:-* 


0^  Of  P«'^o;^ 


..  Z.  i-  p  ■H-7 


Z>S47G 
.T3Z 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS. 


^  treatise 


ON   THE 


INTERr»RET^TI01Sr 


OP   THE 


OLD    AND    NEW   TESTAMENTS. 


MILTON  S.  TERRY,  S.T.D., 

r Professor  of  Old  Testament  Exegesis  in  Garrett  Biblical  Institute, 


K  ■^^'P^— 


KEW  YORK: 
PTIILLirS    (t     HUNT. 

CmClNNA  TT: 

CRANSTO.y  <£'    ST  OWE. 

1885. 


Copyright,   1883,  by 

PHILLIPS    &    HUNT, 

New  York. 


PUBLISHERS'  ANNOUNCEMENT. 


"  I  ^HE  design  of  the  Editors  and  Publishers  of  the 
-^  Biblical  and  Theological  Library  is  to  furnish 
ministers  and  laymen  with  a  series  of  works,  which, 
in  connection  with  the  Commentaries  now  issuing,  will 
make  a  compendious  apparatus  for  study.  While  the 
theology  of  the  volumes  will  be  in  harmony  with  the 
doctrinal  standards  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church, 
the  aim  will  be  to  make  the  entire  Library  acceptable 
to  all  evanorelical  Christians. 

The  following  writers  co-operate  in  the  authorship 
of  the  series  :  Dr.  Harman,  on  the  "  Introduction  to 
the  Study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures ; "  Dr.  Terry,  on 
"Biblical  Hermeneutics  ;"  the  Editors,  on  "Theological 
Encyclopaedia  and  Methodology ; "  Drs.  Bennett  and 
Whitney,  on  "  Biblical,  and  Christian  Archaeology ; " 
Dr.  Latimer,  on  "Systematic  Theology;"  Dr.  Ridgaway, 
on  "Evidences  of  Christianity  ;  "  Dr.  Little,  on  "Chris- 
tian Theism  and  Modern  Speculative  Thought ;"  Dr. 


iv  PUBLISHERS'   ANNOUNCEMENT. 

Crooks,  on  the  "  History  of  Christian  Doctrine  ; ''  and 
Bishop  Hurst,  on  the  "  History  of  the  Christian 
Church." 

In  the  case  of  every  treatise  the  latest  literature  will 
be  consulted,  and  its  results  incorporated.  The  works 
comprised  in  the  series  will  be  printed  in  full  octavo 
size,  and  finished  in  the  best  style  of  typography  and 
binding.  A  copious  index  will  accompany  each  vol- 
ume. All  the  volumes  are  in  process  of  preparation, 
and  will  be  issued  as  rapidly  as  is  consistent  with 
thoroughness. 


PEEFACE  TO  THE  SECOND  EDITION. 


■  »>»  ■ 


The  cordial  welcome  with  which  the  first  edition  of  this  work  has 
heen  received  is  evidence  that  a  treatise  of  its  character  and  scope 
is  needed  in  our  theological  literature.     The  plan  of  the  volume  was 
largely  suggested  by  what  appear  to  be  the  practical  wants  of  most 
theological  students.      Specialists  in  exegetical  learning*  will  push 
their  way  through  all  difficulties,  and  find  delight  in  testing  prin- 
ciples ;  but  the  ordinary  student,  if  led  at  all  into  long-continued 
and  successful  searching  of  the  Scriptures,  must  become  interested 
in  the  practical  work  of  exposition.     The  bare  enunciation  of  prin- 
ciples, with  brief  references  to  texts  in  which  they  are  exemplified, 
is  too  dry  and  taxing  to  the  mind  to  develop  a  taste  for  exegetical 
study;  it  has  a  tendency  rather  to  repel.     In  arranging  the  plan 'of 
the  present  treatise,  it  was  accordingly  designed  from  the  outset  to 
make  it  to  a  noticeable  extent  a  thesaurus  of  interpretation.     The 
statement  of  principles  is  introduced  gradually,   and   abundantly 
illustrated  and  verified  by  means  of  those  difficult  parts  of  Scrip- 
ture in  the  real  meaning  of  which  most  readers  of  the  Bible  are 
supposed   to    be   interested.     It  cannot  be  expected  that  all  our 
interpretations  will  command  unqualified  approval,  but  our  choice 
of  the  more  difficult  Scriptures  for  examples  of  exposition  will  en- 
hance the  value  of  the  work,  and  save  it  from  the  danger,  too 
common  in  such  treatises,  of  running  into  lifeless  platitudes.     With 
ample  illustrations  of  this  kind  before  him,  the  student  comes  by  a 
natural  process  to  grasp  hermeneutical  principles,  and  learns  by 
practice  and  example  rather  than  by  abstract  precept. 

In  order  to  make  the  work  a  complete  manual  for  exegetical 
study,  we  have  in  Part  First,  under  the  head  of  Introduction  to 
Biblical  Hermeneutics,  a  comparative  estimate  of  other  sacred 
books,  an  outline  of  the  character  and  structure  of  the  biblical  lau- 


3  PREFACE  TO  THE  SECOND  EDITION. 

guages,  and  two  brief  chapters  on  Textual  Criticism  and  Inspiration. 
These  topics  are  so  connected  with  biblical  interpretation,  and  some 
of  them,  esi^ecially  a  knowledge  of  the  sacred  tongues,  lie  so  essen- 
tially at  its  basis,  that  our  plan  called  for  some  such  treatment  as 
we  have  given  them.  The  latest  movements  in  the  Higher  Criti- 
cism approach  the  study  of  the  Scriptures  with  the  assumption  that 
our  sacred  books  and  also  the  religion  of  Israel  are  nothing  more 
than  the  sacred  books  and  religions  of  other  nations  (Kuenen,  Re- 
ligion of  Israel,  Eng.  trans.,  vol.  i,  p.  5).  The  chapter  on  the  sacred 
books  of  the  nations  exhibits  the  fallacy  of  such  assumptions,  and 
furnishes  information  which,  being  stored  in  many  costly  volumes, 
it  is  difficult  to  acquire. 

It  should  be  observed,  further,  that  Part  Third  is  not  a  history  of 
Hermeneutics,  but  of  Interpretation.  It  is  designed  to  be  supple- 
mentary in  its  character,  and  somewhat  of  the  nature  of  a  bibliogra- 
phy of  exegetics.  The  different  methods  of  interpretation  which 
have  obtained  currency  or  note  are  presented  under  the  head  of 
Pi-inciples  (Part  Second,  chap,  ii),  but  we  have  attempted  no 
genetic  history  of  Hermeneutics.  In  fact,  no  extended  genetic  de- 
velopment of  hermeneutical  principles  is  traceable  in  history.  AVe 
find  excellent  examples  of  exegesis  in  the  early  Church,  and  execra- 
ble specimens  of  mystical  and  allegorical  exposition  put  forth  in 
modern  times.  History  shows  no  succession  of  schools  of  interpre- 
tation, except  in  recent  controversies,  and  these  appear  in  con- 
nection with  the  varying  methods  of  rationalistic  assault,  narrated 
in  our  chapters  on  the  exegesis  of  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth 
centuries. 


CONTENTS 


AND 


Ali^ALYTIOAL     OUTLII^E. 


PART    FIRST. 

INTRODUCTION  TO  BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS. 


1. 

2. 

8. 

4. 
5. 

6. 

7. 


CHAPTER  I. 
Prelim  inary. 

Hermeneutics  defined,  17. 

General  and  Special  Hermeneutics,  17. 

Old  and  New  Testament  Hermeneutics 
should  not  be  separated,  18. 

Hermeneutics  distinguished  from  Intro- 
duction, Criticism,  and  Exegesis,  19. 

Hermeneutics  both  a  Science  and  an 
Art,  20. 

Necessity  of  Hermeneutics,  20,  21. 

Rank  and  importance  of  Hermeneutics 
in  Theological  Science,  21,  22. 

CHAPTER  n. 
The  Bible  and  other  Sacred  Books. 
.  Knowledge  of  other  Religious  Litera- 
tures a  valuable  Preparation  for  her- 
meneutical  Study,  23. 
;.  Outline  of  the  Christian  Canon,  24. 
;.  Contents  and  general  character  of  other 

Bibles:— 
d)  The  a  vest  a,  25-28. 

(2)  AssTRFAN  Sacred  Eecoeds,  28-33. 

(3)  The  Veda,  ;M-39. 

(4)  TnE  Buddhist  Canon,  40-45. 

(5)  CniNESE  Sacred  Books,  46-52. 

(6)  The  Egyptian  Book  or  the  Dead,  53-57. 

(7)  The  Koran,  57-61. 

(8)  The  Eddas,  62-05. 

.  Each  of  these  books  must  be  studied 

and  judged  as  a  whole,  66. 
.  Notable  Superiority  of  the  Old  and  New 

Testament  Scriptures,  67,  68. 


CHAPTER   III. 
Languages  of  the  Bible. 
1.  Acquaintance  with  the   Original   Lan- 
guages of  Scripture  the  basis  of  all 
sound  Interpretation,  69. 


2.  Origin  and  Growth  of  Languages: — 

(1)  Various  Theories  of  the  Origin  of  Lan- 

guage, 69-71. 

(2)  Origin  probably  supernatural,  71. 

(3)  Confusion  of  Tongues  at  Babel,  71. 

(4)  Formation  of  New  Languages,  72. 

3.  Families  of  Languages  : — 

(1)  Indo-European  family,  73. 

(2)  Scythian,  73. 

(3)  Semitic,  74,  75. 

CHAPTER   IV. 
The  Hebrew  Language. 

1.  Origin  of  the  name  Hebrew.  76,  77. 

2.  Peculiarities  of  the  Ilebivvv  tongue* — 

(1)  The  Letters,  78. 

(2)  The  Vowel-system,  79,  80. 

(3)  The  Three-letter  Root,  80. 

(4)  Conjuarations  of  the  Verb,  80-S2. 

(5)  The  two  Tenses,  82-85. 

(6)  Gender  and  Number  of  Nouns,  86. 

(7)  Simplicity  of  Structure,  87. 

(8)  Omission  of  Copula,  88. 

(!t)  Order  of  Subject  and  Predicat'%  83. 
(10)  Adjectives  and  Particles,  8d,  89. 

3.  Hebuew  Poetry: — 

(1)  Old  Testament  largely  poetical,  90. 

(2)  Parallelism  tlie  distinguishing  feature,  91. 

(3)  Form  essential  to  Poetry,  92-94. 

(4)  Spirit  of  Hebrew  Poetry,  94. 

(5)  Structure  of  Hebrew  Parallelism,  05-98. 

1.  SynoDymnns  Pnrallclisiii.  9G. 

2.  AntithVtic  P.Trallplism.  97. 

3.  Syntlietic  Pnrallelisin.  9",  9S. 

4.  IrrofTuIar  Structure,  99. 

(6)  Alphabetical  Poems  and  Rhymes,  100. 

(7)  Vividness  of  Hebrew  expressions.  101. 

(8)  Elliptical  modes  of  expression,  102. 

(9)  Old  Testament  Anthropomorphism,  103. 

4.  Remarkable  uniformity  of  the  Hebrew 

Language,  104. 

5.  Three  Periods  of  Hebrew  Literature, 

104,  105. 

6.  Hebrew  Language  peculiarly  adapted  to 

embody  God's  ancient  Word,  1  ( '5, 1 06. 

7.  Its  analogy  with  the  Holy  Land,  ioO. 


CONTENTS   AND   ANALYTICAL   OUTLINE. 


■    CHAPTER  V. 
The  Chaldee  Language. 

1.  Eastern  and  Western  Aramaic,  107. 

2.  Biblical  Aramaic  appropriately  called 

Chaldee,  107. 

3.  Early  traces  of  Chalda^an  speech,  108. 

4.  The  Chaldee  passages  of  Daniel,  109. 

5.  The  Chaldee  pas.sages  of  Ezra,  109,  110. 

6.  Grammatical  peculiarities  of  the  Bibli- 

cal Chaldee,  111. 

7.  Foreign  words,  112. 

8.  Historical  and  Apologetical  value  of  the 

Chaldee  portions  of  the  Bible,  113. 

CHAPTER  VI. 
The  Greek  Language. 

1.  Greek  an  Indo-European  tongue,  114. 

2.  Language  and  Civilization  affected  by 

climate  and  natural  scenery,  114. 

3.  Greeks  called  Hellenes,  115. 

4.  Tribes  and  Dialects,  115. 

5.  Ionic  Greek,  116. 

6.  Attic  culture  and  taste,  116. 

7.  Decay  of  Attic  elegance,  116,  117. 

8.  The  later  Attic  or  Common  Dialect,  117. 

9.  Alexandrian  culture,  118. 

10.  The  Hellenists,  118. 

11.  Christian    thought    affecting     Greek 

speech,  119. 

12.  Controversy  between  Purists  and  He- 

braists, 119. 

13.  Sources  of  Information,  120. 

14.  Peculiarities  of  Hellenistic  Greek  : — 

(1)  Foreign  words,  121. 

(2)  Peculiar  orthography,  121. 

(3)  Flexion  of  Nouns  and  Verbs,  121. 

(4)  Heterogeneous  Nouns,  123. 

(5)  New  and  peculiar  forms  of  words,  122. 
(0)  Old  dialects  and  new  words,  122. 

(7)  New  significations  of  words,  123. 

(8)  Hebraisms:— 

1.  In  words,  125. 

2.  In  foims  of  expression,  125. 

3.  In  grammatical  construction,  125. 

15.  Varieties  of  Style  among  New  Testa- 

ment writers,  126. 

16.  Greek  the  most  appropriate  Language 

for  the  Christian  Scriptures,  127. 

17.  The  three  Sacred  Tongues  compared, 

128. 

CHAPTER  VIL 
Textual   Criticism. 

1.  Higher    and    Lower    Criticism    distin- 

guished, 129. 

2.  Interpretation  often  involves   Textual 

Critici.'^m,  129. 

3.  Causes  of  Vaiious  Readings,  130. 

4.  Sources  and   Jleans  of   Textual   Criti- 

cism, ISO,  131. 

5.  Canons  of  Textual  Criticism : — 

(1)  KxTKi-.NAi,  F.viDKNOK,    FouT  Ilules,  1.32,  133. 

(2)  Intkrnai,  KviDKNCK.    Four  lUilc'S,  133-13G. 

6.  These  Canons  are  Principles  rather  than 

Rules,  136. 


CHAPTER  Yin. 
The  Divine  Inspiration  of  the  Bible. 

1.  Inspiration  of  Genius,  137. 

2.  Scripture  Inspiration  superior,  137. 

3.  Divine  and  Human  in  the  Scrijitures, 

138. 

A.  EVIDKNCES   OF  THE   HtJMAN    ELEMENT : — 

(1)  In  Narration  of  historical  facts,  138. 

(2)  In  Style  and  Diction,  139. 

(3)  In  Subject-matter,  130. 

(4)  In  varying  Forms  of  statement,  139. 

B.  EviDKNCKS  OF  THE  DiviNE  Eleme.nt; — 

(1)  In  declarations  of  Paul  and  Peter,  140. 

(2)  In  Old  Testament  claims,  141. 

(3)  In  Jesus'  words,  141. 

4.  Three  important  considerations  : — 

(1)  The  whole  Bible  God's  Book  for  man, 

142. 

(2)  Inspiration  and  Revelation  are  to  be  dis- 

tinguished, 142. 

(3)  Inspiration  a  Particular  Divine  Provi- 

dence, 143. 

5.  Divine  Inspiration  affects   Language 

and  Style,  144. 

6.  Four  kinds  of  Inspiration,  145. 

7.  Facts  and  ideas  expressible  in  a  vari- 

ety of  forms,  145. 

8.  Fallacy  of  trifling  with  minute  details, 

145,"  146. 

9.  No  conflict  between  the  Divine  and 

Human,  146. 

10.  Verbal  Variations  no  valid  Argument 

against  Divine  Inspiration,  147. 

11.  Various  Readings  no  valid  Argument 

against  the  verbal  Inspiration  of  the 
original  Autographs,  148. 

12.  Inaccurate  grammar  and  obscuiity  of 

style  no  valid  Objection,  149 

13.  Error    in    Stephen's    Address    (Acts 

vii,  16),  149,  150. 

14.  Quotation  from  Tayler  Lewis,  150. 


CHAPTER   IX. 
Qualifications  of  an  Interpreter. 

1.  Intellectual  Qualifications: — 

(1)  A  sound,  well-balanced  Mind,  151. 

(2)  Quick  and  clear  Perception,  151. 

(3)  Acuteness  of  Intellect  (Beugcl  and  De 

Wette),  152. 

(4)  Imagination  needed,  but  must  be  con- 

trolled, 152. 

(5)  Sober  Judgment,  153. 

(())  Correctness  and  delicacy  of  Taste,  153. 

(7)  Right  use  of  Reason,  153. 

(8)  Aptness  to  teach,  154. 

2.  Educational  Qualifications: — 
Familiar  acquaintance  with  Geography,  His- 
tory, Chronology,  Antiquities,  Polit;<'s, 
Natural  Science.  Philosophy,  Comparative 
Philology,  and  General  Literature  should 
be  acquired,  154,  155. 

3.  S|)iritual  (Qualifications: — 

(1)  Partly  a  gift,  partly  ac(iuired,  150. 
(•J)  Desire  to  know  the  Trutb,  1.50. 

(3)  Tender  alTection,  157. 

(4)  Eiitliusiasm  for  the  Word  of  God,  157. 

(5)  Reverence  for  (iod,  157. 

(ti)  Connnunion  and  Fellow.ship  with  the  Holy 
Spirit,  157,  158. 


CONTENTS   AND   ANALYTICAL    OUTLINE. 

PART    SECOIVD. 

PRINCIPLES  OF  BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS. 


CHAPTER   I. 
Preliminary. 

1.  Hermeneutical  Principles  defir.ed,  161. 

2.  Importance  of  Sound  Principles,  161. 

3.  True  Method  of  determining  Sound  Prin- 

ciples, 162. 

4.  Ennobling  Tendency  of  hermeneutical 

Study,  162. 

»     CHAPTER   II. 
Different  Methods  of  Interpretation. 

1.  Allegorical  Interpretation(Philo,  Clem- 

ent), 163. 

2.  Mystical  Interpretation  (Origen,  Mau- 

rus,  Swedenborg),  164,  165. 

3.  Pietistic  Interpretation  (Quakers),  165, 

166. 

4.  The  Accommodation-Theory  (Semler), 

166. 

5.  Moral  Interpretation  (Kant),  16V. 

6.  Naturalistic    Interpretation    (Paulus), 

168. 
1.  The  Mythical  Theory  (Strauss),  168- 
170. 

8.  Other    Rationalistic    Theories    (Baur, 

Renan),  170,  171. 

9.  Apologetic    and    Dogmatic    Methods, 

171,  172. 
,  10.  Grammatico-Historical  Interpretation, 
173. 

(1)  The  Bible  to  be  interpreted  like  other 

books,  1~3. 

(2)  Principles  of  Interpretation  grounded  in 

the  Rational  Nature  of  mau,  173,  174. 

(3)  The  Bible,  however,  a  peculiar  book,  174. 

*     CHAPTER   III. 

The  Primary  Meaning  of  Words. 

1.  Words  the  Elements  of  Language,  175. 

2.  Value    and    Pleasure   of    etymological 
■  studies,  175,  176. 

(1)  Illustrated    by  the  word    tKKT^rjala, 

176,  177. 

(2)  Illustrated  by  the  word  123,   177, 

178. 

3.  Value  of  Comparative  Philology,  178. 

4.  Rare  words  and  u-rta^  leynnevn,  179. 

5.  Determining  sense  of  Compound  words, 

ISO. 

CHAPTER   IV. 
The  Usus  Loquendi. 

1.  How  the  meaning  of  words    becomes 

changed,  181. 

2.  Importance  of  attending  to    Usus  Lo- 

quendi, 181. 


3.  Means   of   ascertaining   the    Usus  Lo' 

quendi : — 

(1)  By  the  writer's  own  Deflnitions,  181. 

(2)  By  the  iuiruediate  (Jonte.xt,  182. 

(3)  By  the  Nature  of  the  Subject,  laS. 

(4)  By  Antithesis  or  Contrast,  184. 

(5)  By  Hebraic  Parallelisms,  185. 

(6)  By  relations  of  Subject,  Predicate, 

Adjuncts,  180. 

(7)  By  comparison  of  Parallel  Passages,  186. 

(8)  By  common  and  familiar  Usage,  187. 

(9)  By  the  help  of  Ancient  Versions,  188, 189. 
(10)  By  Ancient  (jlossaries  and  Scholia,  190. 

CHAPTER  V. 
Synonymes. 

1.  Some  words  have  many  Meanings,  lyi. 

2.  Many  different  words  have  like  xMeau- 

ing,  191. 

3.  Seven   Hebrew  words   for   Putting  to 

Death,  192-194. 

4.  Twelve  Hebrew  words  for  Sin,  or  Evil, 

194-197. 

5.  Synonymes  of  the  New  Testament : — 

(1)  KatvoQ  and  veo^,  198. 

(2)  Bwf  and  ^of),  199. 

(3)  'AyrtTTuw  and  0i/lew,  200. 

(4)  OlSa  and  ytvijaKG),  201. 

(5)  ^Apvia,  npi);3aTa,  and  -irpojiuTia,  2nl. 

(6)  Boff/cu  and  Triufian>u,  20 1,  202. 

•  CHAPTER  VI. 

The  Grammatico-historical  Sense. 

1.  Grammatico-historical    Sense    defined, ; 

203. 
Quotation  from  Davidson,  203,  '204 
General  Principles  and  Method? 

certaining  the  Grammatico-his 

Sense,  204,  205. 
Words  and  Sentences  can  have  but  one 

Meaning  in  one  place,  205. 
Narratives  of  Miracles  to  be  understood 

literally,  205. 
Jephthah's  daughter  a  Burnt-offering, 

206. 
Jesus'  Resurrection  a  literal  historical 

Fact,  207,  208. 
Grammatical  Accuracy  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, 208. 
Significance  of  the  Greek  Tenses,  208, 

209. 

CHAPTER  VII. 

*  Context,  Scope,  and  Plan. 
Context,  Scope,  and  Plan  defined,  210. 
The  Scope  of  some  Books  formally  an- 
nounced, 211. 

Plan  and  Scope  of  Genesis  seen  in  its 
Contents  and  Structure,  211,  212. 


204. 
Is  oi'  as-\ 

listo.'L'al  ) 


CONTENTS   AND   ANALYTICAL   OUTLINE. 


4.  Plan  and  Scope  oi'  the  Book  of  Exodus, 

212,  218. 

5.  Subject  and  Plan  of  the  Epistle  to  the 

Romans,  213,  214. 

6.  The  Context,  near  and  remote : — 

(1)  Illustrated  by  Isa.  lii,  13-liii,  13,  214,  215. 

(2)  lllustrateil  by  Matt,  xi,  12,  21.V218. 

(3)  Illustrated  by  Gal.  v,  4,  218,  219. 

'7.  The  Connexion  nuiy  be  Historical,  Dog- 
matical, Logical,  or  Psychological, 
219. 

S.  Importance  of  studying  Context,  Scope, 
and  Plan,  2ly. 

9.  Critical  Tact  and  Ability  needed,  220. 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
Comparison  of  Parallel  Passages. 

1.  Some    Passages    of    Scripture    without 

logical  connexion,  221. 

2.  Value  of  Parallel  Passages,  221. 

3.  The  Bible  a  Self-interpreting  Book,  222. 

4.  Parallels  Verbal  and  Real,  223. 

5.  All  Parallels  must  have  real  Correspon- 

dency, 223. 

6.  The  word  Hate  in  Luke  xiv,  26,  ex- 

plained by  Parallel  Passages,  224,  225. 

7.  Jesus'  words  to  Peter  in  Matt,  xvi,  18, 

explained  by  Parallel  Texts,  225-229. 

8.  Large  portions  of  Scripture  parallel,  230. 


CHAPTER  IX. 
The  Historical  Standpoint. 
Importance  of  knowing  the  Historical 

Standpoint  of  a  writer,  231. 
Historical  Knowledge  essential,  231. 
Difficulty  of  transferring  one's  self  into 
a  remote  age,  232. 

4.  Personal  sanctity  of  ancient  Worthies 

often  unduly  exalted,  232. 

5.  Historical    Occasions    of    the    Psalms, 

233,  234. 

6.  Places  as  well  as  Times  to  be  studied : — 

(1)  Shown  by  Journevs  and  Epistles  of  Paul, 

235,  236. 

(2)  Historical  and  (?eoj]rraphioal  Accuracy  of 

Scripture  proven  by  careful  Research, 
230,  237. 

7.  The  Historical  Standpoint  of  the  Apoc- 

alyijse  :— 

(1)  External  Evidence  dependent  solely  on 

Ireiiajus,  237,  238. 

(2)  .lohn's  own  Testimony  (Rev.  i,  9).  239. 
0)  Internal  Evidence.    Six  Points.  240,  241. 
(4)  (ircat  delicacy  of  Discrimination  neces- 
sary, 242. 

?^.^  Questions   of   Historical    Criticism   in- 
volved, 242. 

CHAPTER    X. 
Figurative   Language. 

1.  Tropes  many  and  various,  243. 

2.  Origin  and  Necessity  of  Figurative  Lan- 

guage, 243,  244. 

3.  Figures  of  Sjieech  suggestive  of  Divine 

Harmonies,  244,  240. 


4.  Principal  Sources  of  Scriptural  Ima- 

gery, 246,  247. 

5.  Specific  rules   for  determining  when 

Language  is  Figurative  are  imprac- 
ticable and  unnecessary,  247. 

6.  Figures    of    Words    and    Figures    of 

Thought,  248. 

7.  Metonymv : — 

(1)  Of  Cause  and  Effect,  248. 

(2)  Of  Subject  and  Adjunct,  249. 

(3)  Of  tbe  8ign  and  tiie  Thing  Signlfled,  250. 

8.  Synecdoche,  250. 

9.  Personification,  251. 

10.  Apostrophe,  252. 

11.  Interrogation,  252. 

12.  Hyperbole,  253. 

13.  Irony,  253. 

CHAPTER   XI. 
Simile  and  Metaphor. 

1.  Simile  defined  and  illustrated,  254. 

2.  Crowding  of  Similes  together,  255. 

3.  Similes  self-interpreting,  255. 

4.  Pleasure  afforded  by  Similes,  256. 

5.  Assumed  Comparisons  or  Illustrations, 

257. 
G.  Metaphor  defined  and  illustrated,  258. 

7.  Sources  of  Scriptural  Metaphors : — 

(1)  Natural  Scenery,  259. 

(2)  Ancient  Customs,  259. 

(3)  Habits  of  Animals,  259,  260. 

(4)  Ritual  Ceremonies,  260. 

8.  Elaborated  and  Mixed  Metaphors,  261. 

9.  Uncertain  Metai)horical  Allusions : — 

(1)  Loosing  of  locks  (Judges  v,  2).  252,  203. 

(2)  Boiling  heart  (Psa.  xlv,  1),  263. 

(3)  Buried  in  Baptism  i,Kum.  vi,  4 ;  Col.  li,  12), 

263,  264. 

CHAPTER   XIL 
Fables,  Riddles,  and  Enigmas. 

1.  Of  the  more  notable  Tropes  of  Scrip- 

ture, 265. 

2.  Characteristics  of  the  Fable,  265. 

(1)  Jotham's  Fable,  266. 

(2)  Jehoasli's  Fable,  266,  267. 

3.  Characteristics  of  the  Riddle,  268. 

(1)  Samson's  Riddle,  268.  , 

(2)  Number  of  the  Beast  (Rev.  xiii,  18),  269. 

(3)  Obscure  Proverbs,  269. 

(4)  Lainech's  Song,  270. 

4.  Enigma  distiuguislied  and  defined,  270, 

271. 
(!)  Enigmatical  element  in  Jesus'  discourse 
with  Nicodennis,  271. 

(2)  In  bis  discourse  witli  the  Samaritan  wom- 

an, 272. 

(3)  Enigma  of  tlie  Sword  in  Luke  xxii,  36,  27.!. 

(4)  Enigmatical  language  addressed  to  Peter 

in  John  xxi,  '8,  273. 

(5)  Figure  of  the  Two  Eagles  in  Ezek.  xvii, 

274,  275. 

CHAPTER   XIII. 
Interpretation  of  Parables. 

1.  Pre-eminence  of  Parabolic  Teaching, 

276. 

2.  The  Parable  defined,  276,  277. 


CONTENTS   AND   ANALYTICAL   OUTLINE. 


3.  General  Use  of  Parables,  277. 

4.  Special  Reason  and  Purpose  of  Jesus' 

Parables,  278,  279. 

5.  Parables  serve  to  test  Character,  280. 
■6.  Superior  beauty  of  Scripture  Parables, 

280. 

T.  Three  essential  elements  of  a  Parable, 
281. 

S.  Three  principal  Rules  for  the  Inter- 
pretation of  Parables,  281,  282. 

9.  Principles  illustrated  in  the  Parable 
of  the  Sower,  282. 

10.  Parable  of  the  Tares,  and  its  Interpre- 

tation, 283. 
(1)  Things  explained  and  things  unnoticed 

in  the  model  Expositions  of  Jesus,  384. 
(8)  We  may  notice  some  things  which  Jesus 

did  not  emphasize,  884,  885. 

(3)  Suggestive  Words  and  Allusions  deserve 

attention  and  comment,  885. 

(4)  Not  specific  Rules,  but  sound  and  dis- 

criminating Judgment,  must  guide  the 
Interpreter,  386. 

11.  Isaiah's  Parable  of  the  Vineyard,  287. 

12.  Parable  of  the  Wicked  Husbandman, 

288. 
18.  Comparison    of    analogous    Parables, 
289. 
(1)  Marriage  of  King's  Son  and  Wicked  Hus- 
bandman, 88'J,  890. 
(3)  Marriage  of  King's  Son  and  Great  Sup- 
per, 890,  891. 

14.  Old  Testament  Parables,  292. 

15.  All  the  Parables  of  Jesus  in  the  Syn- 

optic Gospels,  293. 

16.  Parable  of  the  Labourers  in  the  Vine- 

yard:— 
(1)  Mistakes  of  Interpreters,  894. 
(3)  Occasion  and  Scope,  394,  395. 

(3)  Prominent  Points  in  the  Parable,  296. 

(4)  The  Parable  primarily  an  Admonition  to 

the  Disciples,  396,  897. 

17.  Parable  of  the  Unjust  Steward : — 
(1)  Occasion  and  Aim,  39". 

(3)  Unauthorized  Additions,  398. 

(3)  Jesus'  own  Application,  898. 

(4)  The  Rich  Man  to  be  understood  as  Mam- 

mon, 300. 

(5)  (Jeikie's  Comment,  801. 

»    CHAPTER    XIV. 
Interpretation  of  Allegories. 

1.  Allegory  to  be  distinguished  from  Par- 

able, 302. 

2.  Allegory  a  continued   Metaphor,   202, 

303. 

3.  Same  hermeneutical  Principles  apply  to 

Allegories  as  to  Parables,  304. 

4.  Illustrated  by  Prov.  v,  15-18: — 
(1)  Main  Purpose  to  be  first  sought,  .304. 

(3)  Particular  Allusions  to  be  studied  in  the 
light  of  Main  Purpose,  305,  306. 

5.  Allegory  of  Old  AgeinEccles.  xii,3-7: — 
(1)  Various  Interpretations,  306. 

(3)  The  old  age  of  a  Sensualist,  307. 

(3)  Uncertain  Allusions,  307. 

(4)  Blending  of  Meaning  and  Imagery,  308. 

(5)  The  Hermeneutical  Principles  to  be  kept 

in  \iew,  309. 


6.  Allegory  of  False  Prophets  in  Ezek. 

xiii,  10-15. 

7.  Allegory  of  1  Cor.  iii,  10-15:— 

(1)  Are  the  materials  Persons  or  Doctrines? 

311. 
(8)  Both  views  allowable,  311,  318. 

(3)  The  Passage  paraphrased,  313. 

(4)  A  Warning  rather  than  a  Piophecy,  313, 

314. 

8.  Allegory  of  1  Cor.  v,  6-8  :— 
(1)  The  Context,  315. 

(8)  The  Passage  paraphrased,  315. 
(3)  The  more  important  Allusions  to  be  care- 
fully studied,  316. 

9.  Allegory    of    the    Christian    Armour 

(Eph.  vi),  316. 

10.  Allegory  of  the  Door  and   the  Good 

Shepherd,  (John  x): — 

(1)  Occasion  and  Scope,  317. 

(2)  Import  of  particular  parts,  31S. 

(3)  Jesus'  Explanation  enigmatical,  319,  330. 

11.  Paul's  Allegory  of  the  Covenants: — 
(1)  It  is  Peculiar  and  Exceptional,  381. 

(8)  The  historical  Facts  are  accepted  as  true, 
331. 

(3)  The  Correspondent  Clauses,  338. 

(4)  Paul's  example  as  Authority  in  Allego- 

rizing Scripture  narratives,  388,  38:1 

(5)  Such  methods  to  be  avoided,  or  used  most 

sparingly,  384. 

12.  Interpretation  of  Canticles: — 
(1)  Allegorical  Methods,  .384,  335. 

(3)  Objections  to  the  Allegorical  Method,  325. 
(■3)  Canticles  a  Dramatic  Parable,  386. 

(4)  A  literal  basis  under  oriental  Poetry,  327. 

(5)  Details  not  to  be  pressed  into  mystic  Sig- 

nificance, 387. 

CHAPTER   XV. 
Proverbs  and  Gnomic  Poetry. 

1.  Proverbs  defined  and  described,   328, 

329. 

2.  Their  Use  among  most  ancient  Nations, 

329. 

3.  Hermeneutical    Principles    to    be    ob- 

served : — 
(1)  Discrimination  of  Form  and  Figure,  330. 
(8)  Critical  and  Practical  Sagacity,  331. 

(3)  Attention  to  Context  and  Parallelism,  332. 

(4)  Common  Sense  and  sound  Judgment,  333, 

333. 

CHAPTER   XVI. 
Interpretation  of  Types. 

1.  Types  and  Symbols  Defined  and  Dis- 

tinguished :— 

(1)  Crabb's  Definition,  334. 

(2)  Examples  of  Types  and  Symbols,  .3:i4. 

(3)  Analogy  with  certain  Figures  of  Speech, 

3.35. 

(4)  Principal  Distinction  between  Types  and 

Symbols,  336. 

2.  Essential  Characteristics  of  the  Type : — 

(1)  Notable  Points  of  Resemblance  between 

Type  and  thing  typified,  337. 

(2)  Must  be  Divinely  Appointed,  .337. 

(3)  Must  prefigure  something  Futin-e,  338. 

3.  Classes  of  Old  Testament  Types : — 
(1)  Typical  Persons,  3:38. 

(3)  Typical  Institutions,  339. 
(3i  Tvpical  Offlc(--<,  3:i<). 

(4)  Typical  Events,  339. 

(5)  Typical  Actions,  339  340. 


8 


CONTEXTS   AND   ANALYTICAL   OUTLINE. 


4.  Hermeneutical    principles    to    be    ob- 

served : — 

(1)  All  real   Points  of  Resemblance  to  be 

noted : — 

1.  The  Brazen  Serpent  (Num.  xxi,  4-9),  341. 

2.  Melchizedek  and  Christ  (lleb.  vii),  342. 

(2)  Notable  Differences  and  Contrasts  to  be 

observed  :— 

1.  Moses  and  Christ  (Ileb.  iii,  1-6),  343. 

2.  Adam  and  Christ  (Rom.  v,  12--il),  343. 

5.  Old  Testament  Types  fully  apprehended 

only  by  the  Gospel  revelation,  344. 

6.  Limitation  of  Types : — 

(1)  Bishop  Marsh's" Statement,  345. 

(2)  Too  restrictive  a  Principle,  345. 

(3)  A  broader  Principle  allowable,  346. 

(4)  Qualifying  Observation,  34U. 


CHAPTER    XVII. 

Interpretation  of  Symbols. 

1.  Difficulties  of  the  Subject,  .347. 

2.  Principles  and  Methods  of  procedure, 

347. 

3.  Classification  of  Symbols,  347,  348. 

4.  Examples  of  Visional  Symbols  : — 
(1)  The  Almond  Rod  (Jer.  i.'ll),  348. 
(a)  The  Seething  Pot  (Jer.  i,  13),  349. 

(3)  The   Good  and  Bad  Figs   (Jer.  xxiv), 

349. 

(4)  The  Summer  Fruit  (Amos  viii,  1),  349. 

(5)  Resurrection  of  Dry  Bones  (Ezek.xxxvil), 

350. 

(6)  The  Golden  Candlestick,  350. 

(7)  The  Two  Olive  Trees  (Zech.  iv),   350, 

351 . 

(8)  The  Great  Image  of  Nebuchadnezzar's 

Dream  (Dan.  ii),  352. 

(9)  The  Four  Beasts  of  Dan.  vii,  .353. 

(10)  Riders,  Horns,  and  Smiths  of  Zech.i,  353, 

354. 

(11)  The  Flying  Roll  and  Ephah  (Zech.  v),  351, 

355. 

(12)  The  Four  Chariots  (Zech.  vi),  355. 

5.  The  above  Examples,  largely  explained 

by  the   Sacred  Writers,    authorize 
three  fundamental  Principles : — 

(1)  The  Names  of  Symbols  are  to  be  under- 

stood literally,"  356. 

(2)  Symbols  always  denote  something  differ- 

ent from  themselves,  356. 

(3)  A  Resemblance,  more  or  less  minute,  is 

always  traceable  between  Symbol  and 
thing  Symbolized,  356. 

6.  No  minute  set  of  Hermeneutical  Rules 

practicable,  356. 

7.  Three   general   Principles   all-import- 

ant : — 

(1)  A  stiict  regard  to  the  Historical  Stand- 

point of  the  Writer  or  Prophet,  2.57. 

(2)  Like  regard  to  Scope  and  Cont(ixt,  257. 

(3)  Like  r(>gard  to  Analogy  and  Import  of 

similar  Symbols  and  Figures  cUicvhere 
used,  2.57. 

8.  Fairbairn's  Statement  of  general  Prin- 

ciples : — 

(1)  The  Image  must  be  contemplated  in  its 

broader  Aspects,  3.57. 

(2)  Uniform  and  consistent  Manner  of  In- 

terpretation, 1357. 

9.  Same  Principles  for  explaining  Mate- 

rial Symbols,  357. 
10.  The  Svmbolism  of  Blood,  358. 


U.  The  Symbolism  of  the  Tabernacle: — 

(1)  Names  of  the  Tabernacle  and  their  Sig- 

nificance, 359. 

(2)  A  Divine-human  Relationship  symbol- 

ized, 360,  361. 

(3)  The  Two  Apartments,  .361. 

A.  The  Most  Holv  Place  and  its  Sym- 

bols:— 

1.  The  Aik,  361,. 362. 

2.  Tlie  Capporoth  or  Mercvseat.  3C2. 

3.  The  Cherubim,  30-.'.  A&i. 

B.  The  Holy  Place  and  its  Symuols: — 

1.  The  Talile  ofSliowbiead.  364. 

2.  Tlic  Golden  Candlestick.  364. 

3.  Tlie  Altjir  of  Incense.  365. 

(4)  Great  Altar  and  Laver  in  the  Court,  365. 

(5)  Symbolico-typical  Action  of  High  Priest, 

366,  ;:!(i7. 

(6)  Graduated  Sanctity  of  the  Holy  Places, 

367,  368. 

CHAPTER   XVIII. 
Symbolico-Typical  Actions. 

1.  Acts  performed  in  Visions,  3(50. 

2.  Symbolico-typical   Acts    of   Ezekiel  iv 

and  v : — 

(1)  The  Actions  Outward  and  Real,  370,  371. 

(2)  Five  Objections  considered,  371,  372. 

3.  Hosea's  Symbolical  Marriages : — 

(1)  The  Language  implies  a  Real  Event,  373, 

(2)  Supposed  Impossibility  based  on  JUsap- 

prehension  of  Scope  and  Import,  374. 

(3)  The  names  Gomer  and  Diblaim  not  Sym- 

bolical, 375. 

(4)  Hengstenberg's     Unwarrantable    Asser- 

tions, 375. 

(5)  The  Facts  as  Stated  not  unsupposable,  376. 

(6)  Scope  of  the  Passage  indicated,  377. 

(7)  The  Symbolical  Names   (Jezreel,  Lo-ru- 

hamah,  and  Lo-ammi),  377. 

(8)  The   Prophet's    second    Marriage  to  be 

similarly  explained,  378,  379. 

4.  Our  Lord's  Miracles  Symbolical,  379. 

CHAPTER  XIX. 
Symbolical  Numbers,  Names,  and  Colours. 

L  Process  of  ascertaining  the  Symbolism 
of  Numbers,  380. 

2.  Significance   of   Three,    Four,    Seven, 

Ten,  and  Twelve,  380,  383. 

3.  Symbolical  does  not  always   exclude 

literal  sense  of  Numbers,  384. 

4.  Time,  Times,  and  Half-a-Time,  384. 

5.  Forty-two  Months,  384. 

6.  The  Numbers  Forty  and  Sc\  cnty,  385. 

7.  Prophetic  Designations  of  Time,  383. 

8.  The  Year-Day  Theory  :— 

(1)  Has  no  support  in  Num.  xiv  and  Ezek.  iv, 

aS6,  387. 

(2)  Not  sustained  by  Prophetic  Analogy,  387, 

388. 

(3)  Daniel's  Seventy  Weeks  not  parallel,  3S8. 

(4)  Days  nowhere  properly  mean  Years,  388. 

(5)  Disproved  bv  repeated  failures  in  Inter- 

pretation, "389,  :W0. 

9.  The  Thousand  Years  of  Rev.  xx,  390. 
10.  Symbolical  Names : — 

(1)  'Sodora  and  Egypt,  391. 

(2)  Babylon  and  Jerusalem,  391. 

(3)  Returning  to  Egypt,  392. 

(4)  David  and  Elijah,  392. 
(.5)  Ariel,  392. 

(6)  Leviattian,  392. 


CONTENTS   AND   ANALYTICAL   OUTLINE. 


11.  Symbolism  of  Colours: — 

(1)  Rainbow  and  Tabernaclw  Colours,  393. 

(2)  Import  of  Colours  inferred  from  their 

Associations  :— 

1.  Blue  and  its  Associations,  393. 

2.  Purple  and  Scarlet,  393,  394. 

3.  White  as  symbol  of  Purity,  394. 

4.  Black  and  Red,  394. 

12.  Symbolical  Import  of  Metals  and  Jew- 

els, 395. 

CHAPTER   XX. 

Dreams  and  Prophetic  Ecstasy. 

1.  Methods  of  Divine  Revelation,  396. 

2.  'the  Dreams  of  Scripture,  396,  397. 

3.  Dreams  evince   latent  Powers  of    the 

Soul,  397. 

4.  Jacob's  Dream  at  Bethel,  397,  398. 

5.  Repetition  of  Dreams  and  Visions,  398, 

399. 

6.  Prophetic  or  Visional  Ecstasy : — 

(1)  David's  Messianic  Revelations,  399. 

(2)  Ezelclel's  visional  Rapture,  400. 

(3)  Other  Examples  of  Ecstasy,  400,  401. 

(4)  The  Prophet  impersonating  God,  403. 

*!.  New  Testament  Glossolaly,  or  Speaking 
with  Tongues : — 

(1)  The  Facts  as  recorded,  402,  403. 

(2)  The    Pentecostal    Glossolaly    symbolical, 

403. 

(3)  A  mysterious  Exhibition  of  Soul-powers, 

404. 

CHAPTER   XXI. 

Prophecy  and  its  Interpretation. 

1.  Magnitude    and     Scope    of     Scripture 

Prophecy,  405. 

2.  Prophecy   not   merely   Prediction    but 

Utterance  of  God's  Truth,  406. 

3.  Only  Prophecies  of  the  Future  require 

special  Hermeneutics,  407. 

4.  History  and  Prediction  should  not  be 

Confused,  407. 

5.  Organic  Relations  of  Prophecy : — 

(1)  Progressive  Character  of  Messianic  Proph- 

ecy, 408. 

(2)  Repetition  of   Oracles  against    Heathen 

Powers,  409. 

(3)  Daniel's  Two  Great  Prophecies  (chaps,  ii 

and  vii)  compared,  409,  410. 

(4)  The  Little  Horn  of  Dan.  vii,  8,  and  viii,  9, 

the  same  Power  under  dilTerent   As- 
pects, 410. 

(5)  Other  Prophetic  Repetitions,  411. 

6.  Figurative    and    Symbolical    Style    of 

Prophecy : — 

(1)  Imagery  the  most  natural  Form  of  ex- 

pressing Revelations  obtained  by  Vis- 
ions and  Dreams,  412. 

1.  Illustrated  by  Gen.  iii.  15.  412. 

2.  Pairbairn  on  the  Passajre,  413. 

(2)  Poetic  Form  and  Style  of  several  Proph- 

ecies instanced,  413. 

1.  Isaiah  xiii.  2-13  quoted.  414, 

2.  Refers  to  the  Overthrow  of  Babylon.  414, 

415. 

(3)  Prominence  of  Symbols  in  the  Apocalyptic 

Books,  415. 

(4)  The  Hermeneutical  Principles  to  be  ob- 

served, 415. 


7.  Analysis    and    Comparison   of    Similar 
Prophecies : — 

(1)  Verbal  Analogies,  416. 

(2)  Double  Form  of  Apocalyptic  Visions,  416. 

(3)  Analogies  of  Imagery,  417. 

(4)  Like   Imagery  applied  to  Different  Ob- 

jects, 417. 

(5)  General  Summary,  418. 

CHAPTER    XXII. 
Daniel's  Vision  of  the  Four  Empires. 

1.  Value  of  Daniel's  Twofold  Revelation 

in  illustrating  Hermeneutical  Prin- 
ciples, 418. 

2.  Three  different  Interpretations,  41i>. 

3.  Arguments  for  the  Roman  Tiieory  con- 

sidered, 420,  421. 

4.  Subjective  Presumptions  must  be  set 

aside,  421. 

5.  Daniel's  Historical  Stand[;oint,  422. 

6.  Prominence  of  the  Modes,  422. 

7.  The  Varied  but  parallel  Descriptions, 

422,  423. 

8.  The  Prophet  should  be  allowed  to  ex- 

plain himself,  423,  424. 

9.  The  Prophet's  Point  of  View  in  Dan. 

viii,  424. 

10.  Inner  Harmonv  of  all  the  Visions,  424, 

425. 

11.  Alexander's  Kingdom  and  that  of  his 

Successors  not  two  different  World- 

Powers,  425,  426. 
13.  Conclusion:    A   Median  World-Power 

to  be  recognised  as  succeeding  the 

Babylonian,  426. 
13.  Each  Book  of  Prophecy  to  be  studied 

as  a  Whole,  426. 

CHAPTER   XXTII. 
Old  Testament  Apocalyptics. 

1.  Biblical  Apocalyptics  defined,  427. 

2.  Same  Hermeneutical  Principles  required 

as  in  other  Prophecy,  428. 

3.  The  Revelation  of  Joel : — 

(1)  Joel  the  oldest  formal  Apocalypse,  428. 

(2)  Analysis  of  Joel's  Prophecy,  429-431. 

4.  Ezekiel's  Visions  : — 

(1)  Peculiarities  of  Ezekiel,  432. 

(2)  Analysis  of  Ezekiel's  Prophecies,  432-437. 

5.  The  Artistic  Structure  to  be  Studied, 

437. 

CHAPTER   XXIV. 
The  Gospel  Apocalypse. 

1.  Occasion    of    Jesus'    Apocalyptic    Dis- 

course (Matt,  xxiv),  438. 

2.  Various  Opinions,  438,  439. 

3.  Lange's  Analysis,  439,  44(i. 

4.  The  Question  of  the  Disciples,  440. 

5.  Meaning  of  the  End  of  the  Age,  441. 

6.  Analysis  of  Matt,  xxiv,  xxv.  442,  343. 

7.  Time-Limitation  of  the  Prophecy,  443. 
S.  Import  of  Matt,  xxiv,  14,  444. 

9.  Import  of  Luke  xxi,  24,  445. 


10 


CONTENTS  AND   ANALYTICAL   OUTLINI 


10.  Import  of  Matt,  xxiv,  20-31  :— 

(1)  Literal  Sense  as  urged  by  many  Exposi- 

tors, 445. 

(2)  Analogous  Prophecies  compared,  440. 

(3;  Language  of  Matt,  xxiv,  30,  taken  from 
L>au.  vli,  13,  446,  447. 

(4)  The  Facts  of  Matt,  xxiv,  31,  not  neces- 

sarily visible  to  human  ej'es,  447,  448. 

(5)  Import  of  tit^ewf,  immediately  (verse 

~'i)),  448. 

11.  The  Judgment  of  the  Nations  (Matt. 

XXV,  y  1-4(3):— 
(1)  The  Scripture  Doctrine  of  Judgment,  449. 
(i)  Not  limited  to  one  Last  Day,  4o0. 

(3)  A  Divine  Procedure  which  begins  with 

Christ's  Enthronement,  and  must  con- 
tinue until  he  delivers  up  the  Kingdom 
to  the  Father,  450. 

12.  The  Parousia  coincident  witli  the  Ruiu 

of  the  Temple  and  the  End  of  the 
Pre-Messiauic  Age,  450,  451. 

IS.  Thi.s  Interpretation  harmonizes  all  the 
New  Testament  Declarations  of  the 
Nearness  of  the  Parousia,  452. 

14.  No  valid  Objections,  453. 

CHAPTER  XXV. 
The  Pauline  Eschatology. 

1.  Import  of  1  Thess.  iv,  13-17:— 

(1)  Literal  Translation,  4.54. 

(2)  Four  Things  clearly  expressed,  454. 

(3)  Iniport  of  we.  tite  Uruiu,  wlio  remain  :— 

1.  A  ic'Wis  ot'Luneiiiann  and  Alford,  455. 

2.  View  of  Ellicott.  456. 

3.  The  Two  Opinions  compHred,  45C. 

4.  Tiie   words   imply  an    Expectation   of  a 

Speedy  Coming  of  the  Lord,  450. 

5.  The  Hxegctical  Dilemma,  45T. 

G.  The  Apostle's  doctrine  based  on  most  em- 
phatic Statements  of  Jesus,  457,  45S. 

2.  All  here  described  may  have  occurred 

in  Paul's  generation,  458. 

3.  Not  contradicted  by  2  Thess.  ii,  1-9, 

459. 

4.  The  Apostasy  an  event  of  that  gen- 

eration, 4(10. 

6.  The  Man  of  Sin  described  in  language 
appropriated  from  Daniel's  Proph- 
ecy of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  460. 

f).  The  Prophecy  fulfillecl  in  Nero: — 

(1)  Nero  a  revelation  of  Antichrist,  460. 

(2)  The   Language   not   unsuitable   to   the 

Death  of  Nero,  460. 

(3)  Equivalent  to  Language  of  Dan.  vii,  11, 

461. 

(4)  Nero's  Relations  to  Judaism  and  Chris- 

tianity, 403. 
1.  Import  of  1  Cor.  xv,  20-28,  462,  463. 

8.  Import  of  Phil,  iii,  10,  H,  464. 

9.  Import  of  Luke  xx,  35,  464. 

10.  Import  of  John  v,  24-29,  464,  465. 

CHAPTER   XXVI. 
The  Apocalypse  of  John. 

1.  Systems  of  Interpretation,  466. 

2.  Historical    Standpoint   of   the  Writer, 

4  (;(•>,  407. 

3.  Plan  of  tlu'  Apocalypse,  467. 

4.  Aitilicial  Form  of  the  Apocalypse,  408. 


I.  The  Great  Theme  is  announced  (chap, 
i,  7)  in  the  language  of  Matt,  xxiv,  30, 
468. 

I.  Part  I.     Revelation  of  the  Lamb: — 

(1)  In  the  Epistles  to  the  Seven  Churches,  469. 

(2)  By  the  Opening  of  the  Seven  Seals,  46'.', 
470. 

1.  The  Martyr  Scene  (vi.  9,  10).  470. 

2.  The  Sixth  Sial  (vi.  l'J-17),  4Tl>. 

3.  Striking  Analogies  of  Jesus'  Words,  470, 
471. 

(3)  Byj,he  Sounding  of  the  Seven  Trumpets, 

471. 

1.  The  Plague  from  the  Abyss,  471.  472. 

2.  The  Annies  of  the  Enjihiates.  472. 

3.  The   Miglity   Aiigel   arrayed   with   Clou.i 
and  Lain  bow,  473. 

4.  The  Last  Trumjiet,  474. 
'.  Part  II.    Revelatio.n  ok  the  Bride: — 

(1)  Vision  of  the  Woman  and  the  Dragon,  475. 

(2)  Vision  of  the  Two  Beasts,  470. 

(3)  Vision  of  Moimt  Zion,  477. 

(4)  Vision  of  the  Seven  Last  Plagues,  478. 

(5)  Vision  of  the  Mystic  Babylon.  478. 

1.  Mystery  of  the  Woman  and  the  Beast.  479. 

2.  The  Beast  from  the  Abyss,  4S0,  481. 

3.  Fall  of  the  Mystic  Babylon,  4S2,  4nS. 

(6)  Vision  of  Parousia,  Millennium,  and  Ji;dg- 
ment,  483. 

1.  A  Sevenfold  \  i^ion,  48S. 

2.  The  Millennium  is  the  Gospel  Period  or 
Ai:e.  4S4. 

3.  The  Chiliastic  Interpretation,  4S4.  485. 

4.  Chiliastic  Interpretation  \vith<.ut  .-utlieient 
warrant.  485. 

5.  The  Last  Judgment.  4S6. 

6.  S(iiiie  of  these  Visions  Iransei  lul  the  Time- 
limits  of  the  Book,  4s7. 

7.  The  Millennium  of  Kev.  .\x  now  in  prog- 
ress, 4S7.  488. 

(7)  Vision  of  (he  New  Jerusah-m.  48S. 

1.  Meaning  of  the  >iew  ,)eru.~aiuii.     Three 

views,  489. 

2.  Comp.arlMin  of  Hag.  ii,  6.  7.  and  Ihb.  .\ii. 

L'6-28,  4s9.  490. 

3.  Allusion  oflleb.  xii.  22.  23.  49.i.  491. 

4.  New  Jerusalem  the  lleavenl\   Out  ine  of 

what  the  Tabernacle  .--vmbiilized.  4'.n. 

5.  It   is    the    New   Testament    (  liureh    and 

Kingdom  of  God,  492. 
8.   Summary  of  New  Testanjcnt  Ai)oca]yp- 
tics  and  Eschatology,  492,  493. 

CHAPTER   XXVII. 
No  Double  Sense  in  Prophecy. 

1.  Theory  of  a  Doul)le  Sense  unsettles  all 

sound  Interpretation,  493. 

2.  Typology  and    Double   Sense  of   Lan- 

guage not  to  be  confounded,  494. 

3.  The  suggestive  Fulness  of  the  Prophetic 

Scriptures    no    Proof    of    a    Double 
Sense,  495. 

4.  No  misleading  Designations  of  Time  in 

Prophecy,  495,  496. 

5.  Misuse  of  Peter's   language  in  2  Pot. 

iii,  8,  496. 

6.  Bengel's  fallacious  treatment  of  Matt. 

xxiv,  39,  497,  498. 

7.  Practical  Api)licati()ns  of  Prophecy  may 

be  many,  498. 

8.  MistaUeii  Notions  of  the  Bible  itself  the 

Cause  of  much  False  Exposition,  499. 


CONTENTS   AND   ANALYTICAL   OUTLINE. 


11 


CHAPTER  XXVIII. 
Scripture  Quotations  in  the  Scriptures. 

1.  Four  Classes  of  Quotations: — 

(1)  Old  Test.  Quotations  in  Old  Test.,  500. 

(2)  New  Test.  Quotations  from  Old  Test.,  500. 

(3)  New  Test.  Quotations  in  New  Test.,  501. 

(4)  Quotations  from  Apocryphal  Sources,  501. 

2.  Only  the  Old  Testament  Quotations  in 

the  New  Testament  call  for  special 
hermeneutical  treatment,  502. 

3.  Sources  of  New  Testament  Quotation : — 

(1)  Hebrew  Text,  M2. 

(2)  Septuagint  Version,  502. 

4.  No  uniform  Method  of  Quotation,  502, 

503. 

5.  Inaccurate  Quotations  may  become  cur- 

rent, 503. 

6.  Formulas  and  Methods  of  Quotation, 

504,  505. 

7.  The  formula  i'lia  77 /l??pwi9r/ :  — 

(1)  Peculiar  to  Matthew  and  John,  505. 

(2)  Views  of  Bengel  and  Meyer,  50G. 

(3)  The  Telle  force  of  Iva  generally  to  be 

maintained,  506,  507. 

(4)  Tlie  Ecbatic  sense  negd  not  in  all  cases  be 

denied,  507. 

(5)  "Iva  telic  in  formulas  of  Prophetic  cita- 

tion, 508. 

(6)  Supposed  exception  of  Matt,  ii,  15,  .508, 509. 

8.  Purposes  of  Scripture  Quotation : — 

(1)  For  showing  its  Fulfilment,  509. 

(2)  For  establishing  a  Doctrine,  510. 

(3)  For  confuting  Opponents,  510. 

(4)  For  Authority,  Rhetorical  purposes,  and 

Illustration,  510. 

CHAPTER  XXIX. 

The  False  and  the  True  Accommodation. 

1.  Rationalistic  Theory  to  be  repudiated, 

511. 

2.  The  True  Idea  of  Accommodation,  512. 

3.  Illustrated  by  Jer.  xxxi,  15,  as  quoted 

in  Matt,  ii,'  17,  18,  512,  513. 

CHAPTER   XXX. 
Alleged  Discrepancies  of  the  Scriptures. 

1.  General    Character  of   the    Discrepan- 

cies, 514. 

2.  Causes  of  the  Discrepancies : — 

(1)  Errors  of  Copyists.  514. 

(2)  Various  Names  to  one  person,  514. 

(3)  Different  ways  of  reckoning  Time,  514. 

(4)  Different  Standpoint  and  Aim,  514. 

3.  Discrepancies  in  Genealogical  Tables : — 

(1)  Jacob's  Family  Record  :— 

1.  The  different  Lists  compared,  515-517. 

2.  The  Historical  Standpoint  of  each  List,  517, 

518. 

3.  Hebrew  Style  and  TJsase.  518,  519. 

4.  Substitution  of  Names,  519. 

5.  Desire  to  have  a  definite  and  suggestive 

Number,  520. 

(2)  The  Two  Genealogies  of  Jesus : — 

1.  Different  Hypotheses,  521. 

2.  Views  of  Jerome  and  Africanus.  .522. 

3.  No  Hypothesis  can  claim  absolute  CVi-tain- 

tv.  523. 

4.  Hei-vcy's  Theory.  .523,  524. 

(3)  Genealogies  not  Useles.-s  Scripture,  .524. 


4.  Numerical  Discrepancies,  525. 

5.  Doctrinal  and  Ethical  Discrepancies  : — 

(1)  Supposed  Contlict  between  Law  and  Gos- 

pel, .520. 

(2)  Civil   Rights   maintained  by  Jesus   and 

Paul,  527.     ■ 

(3)  The  Avenging  of  Blood,  528. 

i4)  Difleience  between  Paul  and  James  on 
Justification  :— 

1.  Different  Personal  Experiences.  529,  530. 

2.  Ditl'ereut  Modes  of  A|)i)iehendin^  uad  Kx- 

pressins  (ireat  Trullis.  5.i0. 

3.  Ditt'eivur  Aim  of  each  writer,  531. 

4.  Individual  Freedom  of  each  writer,  531. 

6.  Value  of  Biblical  Discrepancies  : — 

(1)  To  stimulate  Mental  Effort,  532. 

(2)  To  illustrate  Harmony  of  Bible  and  Na- 

ture, 352. 

(3)  To  prove  the  absence  of  Collusion,  352. 

(4)  To  show  the  Spirit  above  the  Letter,  352. 

(5)  To  serve  as  a  Test  of  Moral  Charactei',  352. 

CHAPTER    XXXI. 
Alleged  Contradictions  of  Science. 

1.  Statement  of   Allegations  and  Issuesi 

533. 

2.  Attempts  at  Reconciliation,  533. 

3.  Fundamenttil  Considerations,  533,  534. 

4.  Three    Principal     Points    of    Contro- 

versy:— 

A.  The  Record  of  Miracles: — 

(1)  Assumed  Impossibility  of  Miracles,  534. 

(2)  No    common    Ground   between   Atheist, 

Pantheist,  and  Christian,  535. 

(3)  Deist  cannot  consistently  deny  the  Possi- 

bility of  Miracles,  535. 

(4)  Three  important  Considerations  :— 

1.  Miracles  Parts  of  a  Divine  Order,  535,  .530. 

2.  God's   Ptevelation   involves  tlie  Plan   of  a 

great  Historical  Movement  of  which  Mir- 
acles form  a  Part,  .53<!.  .'")■. T. 

3.  Scripture  Miracles  wortliy  of  God.  .537,  53S. 

B.  Descriptions   of   Physical   phe.no.m- 

ENA  :— 

(1)  Supposed  Evidences  of  False  Astronomy, 

538. 

(2)  standing  Still  of  the  Sun  and  Moon,  540. 

(3)  Narrative  of  the  Deluge  :— 

1.  Objections  to  its  Universality.  541,  542. 

2.  Universal  terms  often  applied  in  Scripture 

to  Limited  Are.is,  543. 

3.  The   No.achic  Delujre   local,   but   probably 

Universal  as  to  tlie  Human  Race,  543. 

C.  The   Oririx    of   the   World   and   op 

Man  :— 

(1)  The  Mosaic  Narrative  of  Creation,  544. 

(2)  Geological  Method  of  Interpretation,  544, 

545. 
(.3)  Cosmological  Method  of  Interpretation, 
545,  546. 

(4)  Idealistic  Method  of  Interpretation,  540- 

548. 

(5)  Grammatico-historical  Interpretation  :— 

1.  Meaning  of  Heavens,  Land,  and  Ci;eati% 

549. 

2.  Biblical  Narrative  not  a  universal  Cosmog- 

ony. 549,  550. 

3.  It  describes  the  Formation  of  the  Land  of 

Eden,  .550. 

4.  This  view  not  a  Hypothesis,  but  requii-ed 

by  a  strict  Interpretation  of  the  Hebrew 
record,  551. 

5.  Doctrines  and  far-reachinj;  Implications  of 

tile  Narrative.  .551.  .5.52. 

6.  No   valid    I'resuniptioii  against  a   limited 

Creation    more   than   against   a   limited 
Flood.  552. 


12 


CONTEXTS  AND   ANALYTICAL   OUTLINE. 


CHAPTER   XXXII. 
Harmony  and  Diversity  of  the  Gospels. 

1.  The  Life  of  Jesus  a  Turning  Point  in 

the  History  of  the  World,  553. 

2.  The  Gospels  the  Chief  Ground  of  Con- 

flict between  Faith  and  Unbelief,  553, 
554. 

3.  Attempts  at  constructing  Gospel  Har- 

monies, 554. 

4.  Use  of  such  Harmonies,  555. 

5.  Three  Points  uf  Consideration: — 

(1)  The  Origin  of  the  Gospels: — 

1.  An  ongin;il  Oral  Gospel,  556. 

2.  No  absolute  Certainty  as  to  the  Particular 

Origin  of  each  Gospel.  S57. 

3.  Probable  Suppositions,  557,  65S. 

(2)  Distinct   Plan    and    Purpose   of    each 

Gospel:^ 

1.  Tradition  of  the  Early  Church,  55S. 

2.  Matthew's  Gospel  adapted  to  .tews.  559. 

3.  Mark's  Gospel  adapted  to  Roman  taste,  .0.59. 

4.  Luke's,  the  Pauline  Gospel  to  the  Gentiles, 

560. 

5.  John's,  the  Spiritual  Gospel  of  the  Life  of 

Faith,  560,  561. 

(3)  CnARACTEMSTlCS    OF  TUB    Sf.VERAL    EvAN- 

OELISTS:^ 

1.  Noticeable    Characteristics    of    Matthew's 

Gospel,  561,  b&l 

2.  Oini>sions  of  the  earlier  Gospels  may  have 

had  a  Purpose.  502,  56^3. 

3.  Harmony  of  the  Gosiiels  enhanced  by  their 

Diversit}',  563,  56-1. 

6.  Unreasonableness  of  Magnifying  tlie  al- 

leged Discrepancies  of  the  Gospels, 
565. 

CHAPTER   XXXIII. 
Progress  of  Doctrine  and  Analogy  of  Faith. 

1.  The  Holy  Scriptures  a  Growth,  5G6. 

2.  Genesis  a  Series   of   Evolutions   and 

Revelations,  567,  5G8. 

3.  The  Mosaic  legislation  a  New  Era  of 

Revelation,  568. 
n)  Doctrine  of  God,  568,  569. 
('2)  Suiierlor  Ethical  and  Civil  Code,  569. 
(3)  Pentateuch  fundanientiil  to  Old  Testa;- 
luent  Revelations,  570. 

4.  Divine     Revelation    continued    after 

Moses,  570. 

5.  Theology  of  the  Psalter,  570,  671. 

6.  The  Solomonic  Proverbial  Philosophy, 

571. 

7.  Old  Testament  Revelation  reached  its 

highest   Spirituality    in    the    Great 
Prophets,  57'2-575. 

8.  Proplietic  link  between  the  Old  and 

Kew  Testaments,  575. 

9.  Christ's  teachings  the  Substance-  but 

not  the  Finality  of  Christian  Doc- 
trine, 575. 

10.  Revelations    continued    after    Jesus' 

Ascension,  576. 

11.  The  Epistles  contain  the  elaborated 

Teachings  of  the  Apostles,  576.  577. 

12.  The  A])ocalypse  a  fitting  Conclusion 

of  the  New  Testauicut  Canon,  .")77, 
578. 


13.  Attention  to  Progress  of  Doctrine  a 

Help  to  Interpretation,  578. 

14.  The  Analogy  of  Faith : — 

(1)  Progress  of  Doctrine  explains  the  true 

Analogy  of  Faith,  579. 

(2)  Two  Degrees  of  the  Analogy  of  Faith  :— 

1.  Positive,  5S0. 

2.  General,  5S0. 

(3)  Limitation  and  Use  of  the  Analogy  of 

Faith  as  a  Principle  of  Interpretation, 
581. 

CHAPTER   XXXIY. 
Doctrinal  and   Practical  Use  of  Scripture. 

1.  Paul's  Statement  of  the  Uses  of  Scrip- 

ture ('2  Tim.  iii,  16),  582. 

2.  Roman  Doctrine  of  Authoritative  In- 

terpretation, 582. 

3.  The    Protestant    Principle    of    Using 

one's  own  Reason,  58.'x 

4.  Statement  and  Defence  of  Scripture 

Doctrine  must  accord  with  correct 
Hermeneutics,  583. 

5.  Biblical  and   Historical   Theologv  dis- 

tiiiguished,  684. 

6.  Human   Tendency  to  be  wise   above 

what  is  written,  585. 

7.  True  and  False  Methods  of  ascertain- 

ing Scripture  Doctrine: — 

(1)  The  Doctrine  of  God,  585,  5S6. 

1.  Citation  from  the  Athanasian  Creed,  3S5. 

2.  Doetrin.il  Symbols  nut  iniscni)tural.  .5S6. 

3.  Plural  Form  olthe  word  Eloliiiii,  5?7. 

4.  Language  of  Gen.  .\ix.  '24,  5bT. 

5.  The  Angel  of  Jehovah,  5s8. 

(i.  New  Testament  Doctrine  of  God,  5S8. 

7.  Mysterious  Distinctions  in  the  Divine  Xa- 

tiu-e.  5S9. 

8.  We  should  .-ivoid  dogmatic  Assertion  .and 

doubtful  te.xts  or  readings,  590. 

(2)  The  Doctrine  of  Vicarious  Atonement, 

590,  591. 

(3)  The  Doctrine  of  Eternal  Pum'shmont.  tm. 

1.  Absence  of  Scriptural  Hope  liu-  the  Wick- 

ed. .592. 

2.  Import  of  M.att.  sii,  32,  and  Mark  iii,  29, 

592. 

3.  Preaching  to  the  Siiirits  in  Prison,  592. 

(4)  Doctrine  not  con  lined  to  one  portion, 

class,  or  style  of  Scriptures,  59.3. 

(5)  Eschatology  taught  chiefly  in  Figurative 

Language.  59 1. 

(6)  Doctrine  of  the  Resurrection  of  the  Dead, 

594. 

(7)  Freedom  from  Prepossessions  and  Pre- 

sumptions, .595. 

(8)  Texts  not  to  be  cited  ad  lUntnm. 

8.  Xew    Testament    Doctrine    not    dear 

without  the  help  of  the  Old,  and 
vire  vcr.m,  5V1(),  5117. 

9.  Confusion  of  Hebrew  and  Aryan  Modes 

of  Thought,  597. 
10.  Practical  and  Homiletical  Use  of  Scrip- 
ture : — 

(1)  Must  be  based  on  true  grammatical  In- 

terpretation, ,508. 

(2)  Personal  Experiences.  Promises,  Admo- 

nitions, and  Warnings  have  lessons  for 
Mil  time,  5;»S,  59(1. 
(.'?)  I'i-:i(-tical  .\|iplii-u;io!is  of  Scrij'turc  if 
btdlt   upmi   erroneous   Intel pi:'I"tion, 
are  thei'cby  made  of  no  ellect,  GOO. 


CONTENTS   AND   ANALYTICAL   OUTLINE. 


13 


PART     THIRD. 

HISTORY  OF  BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION. 


CHAPTER   I. 
Ancient  Jewish  Exegesis. 

1.  Value  and  Importance  of  History  of 

Interpretation,  603. 

2.  Origin  and  Variety  of  Interpretations, 

(503. 

3.  Ezra  and  the   Great   Synagogue,   604, 

605. 

4.  Tlie  Halachah  and  Hagadah,  606-610. 

5.  Philo  JudiEus  and  his  Works,  611-613. 

6.  The  Targums,  614. 

v.  Tlie  Talmud,  615-617. 

CHAPTER   II. 
Later  Rabbinical  Exegesis. 

1.  The  Sect  of  the  Karaites  (Saadia,  Ben 

AH),  618,  619. 
ii.  Schools  of  Tiberias,  Sora  and  Pumba- 

ditha,  620. 

3.  Noted  Rabbinical  E.Kegetes : — 

Rashi,  Aben  Ezra,  Maimonides,  Kimchi,  Cas- 
pi,  Tanchum,  Ralbag,  Abrabanel,  Levita, 
Mendelssohn,  620-638. 

4.  Modern  Rationalistic  Judaism,  628. 

5.  General  Summary,  628. 

CHAPTER   IIL 
The  Earliest  Christian  Exegesis. 

1.  Indicated  in  the  New  Testament  Scrip- 
tures, 629,  630. 

•2.  Allegorizing  Tendency  of  the  Post-Apos- 
tolic Age,  630. 

3.  Apostolic  Fathers  : — 

(1)  Clement  of  Rome,   Barnabas,   Ignatius, 

631,  632. 

(2)  Value  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  633,  633. 

4.  Justin  Martyr,  Theophilus,  Melito,  and 

Irenaeus,  633-636. 

CHAPTER   IV. 
Later  Patristic  Exegesis. 

1.  School  of  Alexandria,  63Y. 

Clemeut,  Origen,  Dionysius,  Pierius,  Peter 
Martyr,  Uesychius,  638-643. 

2.  School  of  Coesarea,  642. 

Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  Pamphilus,  Eusebi- 
us,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  643,  644. 

3.  The  School  of  Antioch,  644. 
Africanus,    Dorotheus,    Lucian,    Eustathius, 

Diodorus,  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  Chry- 
sostom,  Isidore,  Theodoret,  644-64!). 

4.  Schools  of  Edessa  and  Nisibis,  650. 
Ephraem  Syrus,  Barsumas,  Ibas,  651. 

5.  Other  eminent  Fathers  : — 
Athanasius,  Epiphanius,  Basil,  Gregory,  Ul- 

philas,  Andreas,  .\rethas,  651,  653. 


6.  Fathers  of  the  Western  Church : — 
Hippolytus,  Tertulhan,  Cyprian,  Vlctorlnus, 

Hilary,  Ambrose,  Jerome,  Augustine,  Pe- 
lagius,  Tichouius,  Vincent,  Cassiodorus, 
Gregory  the  Great,  653-659. 

7.  General  Character  of  Patristic  Exege- 

sis, 660. 

CHAPTER  V. 

Exegesis  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

1.  No  great  Exegetes  during  this  Period, 

661. 

2.  The  Catenists : — 

Procoplus  of  Gaza,  Bede,  Alcuin,  Maurus, 
Haymo,  Strabo,  Druthmar,  tEcumeuius, 
Theophylatt,  Lanfrauc,  Willeram,  Rupert, 
Lombard,  Zigabenus,  Joachim,  Aquinas, 
Bonaventura,  Hugo,  Albert,  661-66r. 

3.  Writers    of    the   Fourteenth    and    Fif- 

teenth Centuries : — 
Nicholas  de  Lyra,  Wycliffe,   Huss,  Wessel, 
Gerson,  Laurentius  Valla,  Reucblln,  Eras- 
mus,   Lefevre,   Mirandula,   Sanctes  Fag- 
nlnus,  6137-672. 
4-  The  First  Polyglots,  672. 

CHAPTER  VI. 
Exegesis  of  the  Reformation. 

1.  The  Dawn  of  a  New  Era,  673. 

2.  The  great  Expositors  of  tliis  Period : — 
Luther,  Melanchthnn,  Zwlugle,  fficolampa- 

dius,  Pellican,  Minister,  Calvin,  Beza,  Cas- 
tellio,  Bullinger,  Flacius,  Piscator,  Junius, 
Marlorat,  Maldonatus,  673-680. 

3.  Translations  of  the  Bible.  680,  681. 

4.  Antwerp  and  Nuremberg  Polyglots,  681. 

5.  Tendencies  of  Lutheran  and  Reformed 

Parties,  681,  682. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

Exegesis  of  the  Seventeenth  Century. 

1.  Progress  of  Biljlical  Studies,  683. 

(1)  Hebrew  Philology  promoted  by  Buxlorf, 

Schindler,  VatabluSf  De  Dieii,  Drusius, 
and  Scaliger,  683. 

(2)  King  James'  English  Version,  683. 

(3)  Paris  and  London  Polyglots,  684. 

(4)  Critici  Sacri  and  Poole's  Synopsis,  684, 035. 

2.  Distinguished  English  Exegetes  : — 
Lightfoot,    Pocock,    Hammond,  -Ainsworth, 

Gataker,  Usher,  Owen,  Mede,  685-688. 

3.  French  Biblical  Schohirs,  688. 
Casaubon,  Cappel,  Simon,  Bochart,  088,  689, 

4.  Biblical  Scholars  in  Holland  : — 
Arminjus,  Grotius,  Voetius,  Cocceius,  Leus- 

den,  6S9-693. 

5.  German  Biblical  Scholars  : — 
Olearius,  Glassius,  Schmidt,  Pfeifter,  693. 

0.  Progress  of  Free  Thought,  694. 


14 


CONTENTS   AND   ANALYTICAL   OUTLINE. 


CHAPTER   Vlir. 
Exegesis  of  the  Eighteenth  Century. 

1.  Eighteenth  Century  a  period  of  En- 

lightenment, 695. 

2.  Dutch,  German,  and  French  Biblical 

Scholars : — 
Vitringa,  Witsius,  Lampe,  Veneiua,  Le  Clerc, 
Scti aliens,  Uelaud,  Sctioettgeii,  Aleiischen, 
Surentiuslus,  Leydecker,  We-ssfimg,  J.  C. 
Wolf,  Alberti,  JKypke,  Ualmel,  lieausobre, 
Quesnel,  ()95-ti97. 
8.  Progress  in  Textual  Criticism  : — 
Houbigant,  Kennicott,  De  Rossi,  Mill,  Bent- 
ley,  Bengel,  Welstein,  Griesliacli,  GUd-iOO. 

4.  Textual  Criticism  opposed  by  ilie  Voe- 

tian  School,  VUO. 

5.  English  Exegetes  : — 

Patrick,  Whitby,  W.  Lowth,  R.  T,(jvvt!i,  Henry, 
Doddridge,  Uodd,  Scott,  Gill,  Cbandler, 
Pearce,  Mackniglat,  Campbell,  Newcouie, 
Blayney,  Green,  Wells,  Wesley,  roo-7t>3. 

6.  English  Deistical  Writers  : — 
Blount,  Toland,  Shaftesbury,  Collins.  Wool- 

ston,   Tindal,    Morgan,    Chubb,   Boling- 
broke,  Hume,  703,  704. 
V.  English  Anti-deistical  Writers  :— 
Chandler,  Sherlock,  Butler,  Conybeare,  Le- 
land,  Waterland,  Warburton,  705. 

8.  French  Unbelief: — 

Condillac,  Voltaire,  Diderot,  Rousseau,  Vol- 
ney,  705. 

9.  Rise  and  Decline  of  Pietism : — 
Spener,Franeke,  Michaelis,  Mosheim,  Koppe, 

Emesti,  Keil,  Herder,  C.von  Wolf,  Lange, 
Berleburg  Bible  and  Wertheim  Bible, 
Baumgaiten,  705-709. 

10.  Growth  of  German  Rationalism  : — 
Sem'.er,  Edelmann,  Bahrdt,  Nigolai,  Wolfen- 

biittel  Fragments,  Teller's  Lexicon,  Schol- 
arly form  of  Rationalism,  710,  711. 

11.  Immanuel    Kant     and     Philosophical 

Criticism,  712. 


CHAPTER   IX. 
Exegesis  of  the  Nineteenth  Century. 

1.  Progress  of  Biblical  Science,  7lo. 

2.  German  Rationalistic  School  of  Inter- 

preters : — 
Eichhorn,  Paulus,  Critics  of  the  Pentateuch 
(Astruc,  Vater,  etc.),  Heyue,  Gable--,  G.  L. 
Bauer,  Sirau.s.,,  V.'eisse,  Bruno  Baur,  V.  C. 
Baur  and  the  Tiibiugen  School,  French 
Critical  School  (Renan,  etc.),  713-717. 

3.  German  Mediation  School  of  Interpre- 

ters : — 
Schleiermacher,  Neander,  De  AVette,  Liickc, 
Rosenmiiller,    Maurer,    Berthohlt,    Lcn- 
gerke,  Kuinoel,  Gesenius,  Ewaid,  Hupielu, 
Hofifmann,  717-723. 

4.  German   Evangelical  School  of    Inter- 

preters : — 
Storr  and  Old  Tiibingen  School,  Hengsten- 
berg,  Havernick,  Bleek,  Umbreit,  Ullmann, 
Tholuck,  Stier,  Olshausen,  Baumgarten, 
Philippi,  Winer,  Meyer,  Auberlen,  Kurtz, 
Keil,  Delitzsch,  J.  P.  Lange,  Godet,  Lut- 
hardt,  7'2.3-72('. 

5.  English  Exegetes : — 

Adam  Clarke,  Benson,  Watson,  Henderson, 
Bloomfleld,  Kitto,  Home,  Davidson,  .\!- 
foid,  Wordsworth,  Trench,  Ellicott,  J.  B. 
Lightfoot,  Eadie,  Gloag,  Murphy.  Morison, 
Perowne,  Jamieson,  Cook,  Stanley,  Joviett, 
Convbeai'e.  Howsou,  Lewin,  Elliott,  Ka- 
liscli,  Ginsburg,  728-733. 

6.  American  Exegetes  : — 

Stuart,  Robinson,  Alexander,  Norton,  Hodge, 
Turner,  Bush,  Barnes,  Jacobus,  Owen. 
Whedon,  Cowles,  Conant,  Strong,  (iardi- 
ner,  Shedd,  733-735.    , 

7.  New  Testament  Textual  Ci'iticism  : — 
Knapp,  Schulz,  Scholz,  Lachnianu.  Tischen- 

dorf,  Tregelles,  Westcottand  Hort,  73.j,  73d, 

8.  The  Revised  English  Version,  737. 

9.  Present  Condition  and  Demands  of  Bib- 

lical Interpretation,  737,  738. 


1.  Bibliography  of  Hermeneutics 739 

2.  Index  of  Scripture  Texts 153 

3.  General  Index 770 


PART  FIRST. 


INTRODUCTION  TO  BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS. 


It  vjcre  indeed  meet  for  us  -not  at  all  to  require  the  aid  of  the  written  Word, 
hut  to  exhibit  a  life  so  pure  that  the  grace  of  the  Spirit  should  he  instead  of  hooTcs 
to  our  souls,  and  that  as  these  are  inscribed  with  ink,  even  so  should  our  hearts 
he  with  the  Spirit,  ^ut,  since  we  have  utterly  put  away  from  us  this  grace, 
come,  let  us  at  any  rate  emhrace  the  second-hest  course.  For  if  it  he  a  hlame  to 
stand  in  need  of  written  words,  and  not  to  have  hrought  down  on  ourselves  the 
grace  of  the  Spirit,  consider  how  heavy  the  charge  of  not  choosing  to  profit  even 
after  this  assistance,  hut  rather  treating  what  is  written  with  neglect,  as  if  it 
were  cast  forth  without  purpose,  and  at  random,  and  so  bringing  down  upon 
ourselves  our  punishment  with  increase.  ^ut  that  no  such  effect  may  ensue, 
let  us  give  strict  heed  unto  the  things  that  are  written ;  and  let  us  learn  how 
the  Old  Xjaw  was  given  on  the  one  hand,  and  how,  on  the  other,  the  JTew 
Covenant. —  Ciikysostou. 


INTEODUCTION 

TO 

BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

PRELIMINARY. 

Hekmeisteutics  is  the  science  of  interpretation.  The  word  is  usu- 
ally applied  to  the  explanation  of  written  documents,  and  may 
tiierefore  be  more  specifically  defined  as  the  science  of  nermeneutics 
interpreting  an  author's  language.'  This  science  as-  defined, 
sumes  that  there  are  divers  modes  of  thought  and  ambiguities  of 
expression  among  men,  and,  accordingly,  it  aims  to  remove  the 
'  supposable  differences  between  a  writer  and  his  readers,  so  that  the 
meaning  of  the  one  may  be  truly  and  accurately  apjirehended  by 
the  others. 

It  is  common  to  distinguish  between  General  and  Special  Her- 
meneutics.     General  Ilermeneutics   is  devoted  to  the   ^, 

General      and 

general  principles  which  are  applicable  to  the  inter^^re-  special  Her- 
tation  of  all  languages  and  writing.  It  may  appropri-  ™  °  " 
ately  take  cognizance  of  the  logical  operations  of  the  human  mind, 
and  the  philosophy  of  human  speech.  Special  Hermeneutics  is  de- 
voted rather  to  the  explanation  of  particular  books  and  classes  of 
writings.  Thus,  historical,  poetical,  philosophical,  and  prophetical 
writings  differ  from  each  other  in  numerous  particulars,  and  each 
class  requires  for  its  projDer  exposition  the  application  of  principles 
and  methods  adapted  to  its  own  peculiar  character  and  style. 
Special  Hermeneutics,  according  to  Cellerier,  is  a  science  practical 
and  almost  empirical,  and  searches  after  rules  and  solutions  ;  while 
General  Hermeneutics  is  methodical  and  philosojihical,  and  searches 
for  principles  and  methods.^ 

'  The  word  hermeneutics  is  of  Greek  origin,  from  epfiTjvevu,  to  interpret,  to  ex- 
plain ;  thence  the  adjective  ?/  epfirji'EVTiuTi  (sc.  Texvr]\  that  is,  the  hermeneuiieal  art, 
and  thence  our  word  hermeneutics,  the  science  or  art  of  interpretation.  Closely  kin- 
dred is  also  the  name  '■E/jfir/r,  Ilermcs,  or  Mercury,  who,  beai'ing  a  golden  rod  of  magic 
power,  figures  in  Grecian  mythology  as  the  messenger  of  the  gods,  the  tutelary  deity 
of  speech,  of  writing,  of  arts  and  sciences,  and  of  all  skill  and  accomplishments. 

^  Manuel  d'Hermenoutiquc  Biblique,  p.  5.     Geneva,  1852. 
2 


18  INTRODUCTION  TO 

Biblical  or  Sacred  Hermeneutics  is  the  science  of  interpreting 
the  Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments. 

Biblical  or  Sa-  "i  ,  m  .       tit       •      i-  ^ 

cred  Heme-  Inasmuch  as  these  two  lestaments  difter  m  form,  lan« 
neutics.  guage,  and   historical   conditions,  many  writers  have 

deemed  it  preferable  to  treat  the  hermeneutics  of  each  Testament 
separately.  And  as  the  New  Testament  is  the  later  and  fuller  rev- 
elation, its  interpretation  has  received  the  fuller  and  more  frequent 
attention/  But  it  may  be  questioned  whether  such  a  separate 
treatment  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  is  the  better  course.  It 
Old  and  New  ^^  ^^  *^^®  ^^'^^  importance  to  observe  that,  from  a  Christ- 
Test.  Herme-  ian  point  of  view,  the  Old  Testament  cannot  be  fully 
iTfe  separ-  apprehended  without  the  help  of  the  New.  The  mys- 
ated.  tery  of  Christ,  which  in  other  generations  was  not  made 

known  unto  men,  was  revealed  unto  the  apostles  and  prophets  of 
the  New  Testament  (Eph.  iii,  5),  and  that  revelation  sheds  a  flood 
of  light  upon  numerous  portions  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  is  equally  true  that  a  scientific  interpi-etation  of  the 
New  Testament  is  imjjossible  without  a  thorough  knowledge  of  the 
older  Scriptures.  The  very  language  of  the  New  Testament,  though 
belonging  to  another  family  of  human  tongues,  is  notably  liebraic. 
The  style,  diction,  and  spirit  of  many  parts  of  the  Greek  Testament 
cannot  be  properly  appreciated  without  acquaintance  with  the  style 
and  spirit  of  the  Hebrew  prophets.  The  Old  Testament  also  abounds 
in  testimony  of  the  Christ  (Luke  xxiv,  27,  44  ;  John  v,  39  ;  Acts 
X,  43),  the  illustration  and  fulfillment  of  which  can  be  seen  only  in 
the  light  of  the  Christian  revelation.  In  short,  the  whole  Bible  is 
a  divinely  constructed  unity,  and  there  is  danger  that,  in  studying 
one  part  to  the  comparative  neglect  of  the  other,  we  may  fall  into 
one-sided  and  erroneous  methods  of  exposition.     The  Holy  Scrip- 

'  Among  the  more  important  modern  works  on  the  hermeneutics  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment are:  Ernesti,  Institutio  Interpretis  Novi  Testament!  (Lips.,  1761),  translated  into 
English  by  M.  Stuart  (Andover,  1827),  and  Terrot  (Edin.,  1843);  Klausen,  Ilerme- 
neutik  des  neucn  Testamontes  (Lpz.,  1841);  Wilke,  Die  Hermeneutik  des  neuen  Tcs- 
Jamentes  systcmatisch  dargestellt  (Lpz.,  1843) ;  Doedes,  Manual  of  Hermeneutics  for 
the  Writings  of  the  New  Testament,  translated  from  the  Dutch  by  Stegmann  (Edin., 
1867);  Fairbairn,  Hermeneutical  Manual  of  the  New  Testament  (Phila.,  1859);  Im- 
mer,  Hermeneutics  of  the  New  Testament,  translated  from  the  German  by  A.  H.  New- 
•man  (Andover,  1877).  The  principal  treatises  on  Old  Testament  hermeneutics  are: 
Meyer,  Versuch  einer  Hermeneutik  des  alten  Testaments  (1790);  Pareau,  Institutio 
Interpretis  Veteris  Testamenti  (1822),  translated  by  Forbes  for  the  Edinburgh  Biblical 
Cabinet.  The  hermeneutics  of  both  Testaments  is  treated  by  Seller,  Biblical  Her- 
meneutics, or  the  Art  of  Scripture  Interpretation,  translated  from  the  German  by 
Wright  (Lond.,  183.5);  Davidson,  Sacred  Hermeneutics  (Edin.,  1843),  Cellerier's  Man- 
ual, mentioned  above,  recently  translated  into  English  by  Elliott  and  Harsha  (N.  Y., 
1881),  and  Lange,  Grundrissderbiblischen Hermeneutik  (Heidelb.,  1878). 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  19 

tures  should  be  studied  as  a  whole,  for  their  several  parts  were  giv- 
en in  manifold  portions  and  modes  (noXvfiepibg  Kai  TroXvTpoTTCjg,  Heb. 
i,  1),  and,  taken  all  together,  they  constitute  a  remarkably  self -in- 
terpreting volume. 

Biblical  Hermeneutics,  having  a  specific  field  of  its  own,  should 
be  carefully  distinguished  from  other  branches  of  theo-  Bisunguished 
logical  science  with  which  it  is  often  and  quite  naturally  yo'"c"r '^"'^" 
associated.  It  is  to  be  distinguished  from  Biblical  In-  and  Exegesis. 
troduction.  Textual  Criticism,  and  Exegesis.  Biblical  Introduction, 
or  Isagogics,  is  devoted  to  the  historico-critical  examination  of  the 
different  books  of  the  Bible.  It  inquires  after  their  age,  author- 
ship, genuineness,  and  canonical  authority,  tracing  at  the  same  time 
their  origin,  preservation,  and  integrity,  and  exhibiting  their  con- 
tents, relative  rank,  and  general  character  and  value.  The  scien- 
tific treatment  of  these  several  subjects  is  often  called  the  "  Higher 
Criticism."  Textual  Criticism  has  for  its  special  object  Textual  cnti- 
the  ascertaining  of  the  exact  words  of  the  original  texts  cism. 
of  the  saci'ed  books.  Its  method  of  procedure  is  to  collate  and 
compare  ancient  manuscripts,  ancient  versions,  and  ancient  scripture 
quotations,  and,  by  careful  and  discriminating  judgment,  sift  con- 
flicting testimony,  weigh  the  evidences  of  all  kinds,  and  thus  en- 
deavour to  determine  the  true  reading  of  every  doubtful  text. 
This  science  is  often  called  the  "Lower  Criticism."  "Where  such 
criticism  ends,  Hermeneutics  j^roperly  begins,  and  aims  to  establish 
the  principles,  methods,  and  rules  which  are  needful  to  unfold  the 
sense  of  what  is  written.  Its  object  is  to  elucidate  Avhatever  may 
be  obscure  or  ill-defined,  so  that  every  reader  may  be  able,  by  an 
intelligent  process,  to  obtain  the  exact  ideas  intended  by  the  author. 
Exegesis  is  the  application  of  these  principles  and  laws,  Exegesis  and 
the  actual  bringing  out  into  formal  statement,  and  by  Exposition, 
other  terms,  the  meaning  of  the  author's  words.  Exegesis  is  re- 
lated to  hermeneutics  as  preaching  is  to  homiletics,  or,  in  general, 
as  practice  is  to  theory.  Exposition  is  another  word  often  used 
synonymously  with  exegesis,  and  has  essentially  the  same  significa- 
tion ;  and  yet,  perhaps,  in  common  usage,  exposition  denotes  a  more 
extended  development  and  illustration  of  the  sense,  dealing  more 
largely  M'ith  other  scriptures  by  comparison  and  contrast.  We 
observe,  accordingly,  that  the  writer  on  Biblical  Introduction  ex- 
amines the  historical  foundations  and  canonical  authority  of  the 
books  of  Scripture.  The  textual  critic  detects  interpolations,  emends 
false  readings,  and  aims  to  give  us  the  very  words  which  the  sacred 
writers  used.  The  exegete  takes  up  these  words,  and  by  means  of 
the  principles  of  hermeneutics,  defines  their  meaning,  elucidates  the 


20  INTRODUCTION   TO 

scope  and  plan  of  each  writer,  and  brings  forth  the  grammatico- 
historical  sense  of  what  each  book  contains.  The  expositor  builds 
upon  the  labours  both  of  critics  and  exegetes,  and  sets  forth  in  fuller 
form,  and  by  ample  illustj*ation,  the  ideas,  doctrines,  and  moral 
lessons  of  the  Scripture.' 

But  while  w^e  are  careful  to  distinguish  hermeneutics  from  these 
kindred  branches  of  exegetical  theology,  we  should  not  fail  to  note 
that  a  science  of  interpretation  must  essentially  de2:)end  on  exegesis 
for  the  maintenance  and  illustration  of  its  principles  and  rules.  As 
the  full  grammar  of  a  language  establishes  its  principles  by  sufficient 
examples  and  by  formal  praxis,  so  a  science  of  hermeneutics  must 
needs  verify  and  illustrate  its  jDrinciiDles  by  examjjles  of  their  prac- 
tical application.  Its  province  is  not  merely  to  define  principles 
and  methods,  but  also  to  exemj^lify  and  illusti*ate  them.  Herme- 
neutics, therefore,  is  both  a  science  and  an  art.     As  a 

Hermeneutics  ,  '    ^  / 

both  a  Science  Science,  it  enunciates  principles,  investigates  the  laws 
an  an  .  ^£  thought  and  language,  and  classifies  its  facts  and 
results.  As  an  art,  it  teaches  what  application  these  principles 
should  have,  and  establishes  their  soundness  by  showing  their  prac- 
tical value  in  the  elucidation  of  the  more  difficult  scriptvxres.  The 
hermeneutical  art  thus  cultivates  and  establishes  a  valid  exegetical 
procedure. 

The  necessity  of  a  science  of  interpretation  is  apparent  from  the 
Necessity  of  diversities  of  mind  and  culture  among  men.  Personal 
Hermeneutics.  intercourse  between  individuals  of  the  same  nation  and 
language  is  often  difficult  and  embarrassing  by  reason  of  their  dif- 
ferent styles  of  thought  and  expression.  Even  the  Apostle  Peter 
found  in  Paul's  epistles  things  which  were  difficult  to  understand 
(dvavorjra,  2  Pet.  iii,  16).  The  man  of  broad  and  liberal  culture 
lives  and  moves  in  a  diffei'cnt  world  from  the  unlettered  peasant, 
so  much  so  that  sometimes  the  ordinnry  conversation  of  the  one  is 
scarcely  intelligible  to  the  other.  Different  schools  of  metaphysics 
and  opposing  systems  of  theology  have  often  led  their  several  ad- 
vocates into  strange  misunderstandings.  Tlie  speculative  philoso- 
pher, Avho  ponders  long  on  abstract    themes,  and  by   deep    study 

'  Docdes  thus  iliseriminatos  between  explaining  and  interpreting:  "  To  explain, 
properly  signifies  the  unfolding  of  what  is  contained  in  the  words,  and  to'  interpret, 
the  making  clear  of  what  is  not  clear  by  casting  light  on  that  which  is  obscure.  Very 
often  one  interprets  l)y  means  of  explaining,  namely,  when,  by  unfolding  the  sense  of 
the  words,  liglit  is  reflected  on  what  is  said  or  written;  but  it  cannot  be  said  that  one 
explains  by  interpreting.  While  explaining  generally  is  interpreting,  interpreting, 
properly  speaking,  is  not  explaining.  But  we  do  not  usually  observe  this  distinction 
in  making  use  of  these  terms,  and  may  without  harm  use  them  promiscuously." 
Manual  of  Hermeneutics,  p.  4. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  21 

constructs  a  doctrine  or  system  clear  to  his  own  mind,  may  find  it 
difficult  to  set  forth  his  views  to  others  so  as  to  prevent  all  miscon- 
ception. His  whole  subject  matter  lies  beyond  the  range  of  com- 
mon thought.  The  hearers  or  readers,  in  such  a  case,  must,  like 
the  philosopher  himself,  dwell  long  upon  the  subject.  They  must 
have  terms  defined,  and  ideas  illustrated,  until,  step  by  stej:),  they 
come  to  imbibe  the  genius  and  spirit  of  the  new  philosophy.  But 
especially  great  and  manifold  are  the  difficulties  of  understanding 
the  writings  of  those  who  differ  from  us  in  language  and  national- 
ity. The  learned  themselves  become  divided  in  their  essays  to 
decipher  and  interpret  the  records  of  the  past.  Volumes  and  li- 
braries have  been  written  to  elucidate  the  obscurities  of  the  Greek 
and  Roman  classics.  The  foremost  scholars  and  linguists  of  the  pres- 
ent generation  are  busied  in  the  study  and  exposition  of  the  sacred 
books  of  the  Chinese,  the  Plindus,  the  Parsees,  aifcd  the  Egyptians, 
and,  after  all  their  learned  labours,  they  disagree  in  the  translation 
and  solution  of  many  a  passage.  How  much  more  might  we  ex- 
pect great  differences  of  opinion  in  the  interpretation  of  a  book 
like  the  Bible,  composed  at  sundry  times  and  in  many  parts  and 
modes,  and  ranging  through  many  departments  of  literature! 
What  obstacles  might  reasonably  be  expected  in  the  interpretation 
of  a  record  of  divine  revelation,  in  which  heavenly  thoughts,  un- 
known to  men  before,  were  made  to  express  themselves  in  the  im- 
perfect formulas  of  human  speech!  The  most  contradictory  rules 
of  interpretation  have  been  propounded,  and  expositions  have  been 
made  to  suit  the  peculiar  tastes  and  prejudices  of  writers  or  to  main- 
tain preconceived  opinions,  until  all  scientific  method  has  been  set 
at  nought,  and  each  interpreter  became  a  law  unto  himself.  Hence 
the  necessity  of  well-defined  and  self-consistent  principles  of  Script- 
ure interpretation.  Only  as  exegetes  come  to  adopt  common  prin- 
ciples and  m,ethods  of  procedure,  Avill  the  interpretation  of  the 
Bible  attain  the  dignity  and  certainty  of  an  cstal)lished  science. 

The  rank  and  importance  of  Biblical  PIcrmeneutics  among  the 
various  studies  embraced  in  Theological  Encyclopaedia  ^^^^^  ^^^  ^^_ 
and  Methodology  is  apparent  from  the  fundamental  re-   portance      of 

.  .  IlGrinciiGiitic3 

lation  which  it  sustains  to  them  all.  For  the  Scripture  jn  Theological 
revelation  is  itself  essentially  the  centime  and  substance  Science, 
of  all  theological  science.  It  contains  the  clearest  and  fullest  exhi- 
bition  of  the  person  and  character  of  God,  and  of  the  spiritual  needs 
and  possibilities  of  man.  A  sound  and  trustworthy  interpretation  of 
the  scripture  records,  therefore,  is  the  root  and  basis  of  all  revealed 
theology.  Without  it  Systematic  Theology,  or  Dogmatics,  could 
not  b*e  legitimately  constructed,  and  would,  in  fact,  be  essentially 


22  INTRODUCTION  TO 

impossible.  For  the  doctrines  of  revelation  can  only  be  learned 
from  a  correct  understanding  of  the  oracles  of  God.  Historical 
Theology,  also,  tracing  as  it  does  the  thought  and  life  of  the  Church, 
must  needs  take  cognizance  of  the  principles  and  methods  of  script- 
ure interpretation  which  have  so  largely  controlled  in  the  develop- 
ment of  that  thought  and  life.  The  creeds  of  Christendom  assume 
to  rest  upon  the  teachings  of  the  inspired  Scriptures.  Apologetics, 
polemics,  ethics,  and  all  that  is  embraced  in  Practical  Theology,  are 
ever  making  appeal  to  the  authoritative  records  of  the  Christian 
faith.  The  great  work  of  the  Christian  ministry  is  to  preach  the 
word  ;  and  that  most  important  labour  cannot  be  effectually  done 
without  a  thorough  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures  and  skill  in  the 
interpretation  and  application  of  the  same.  Personal  piety  and 
practical  godliness  are  nourished  by  the  study  of  this  written  word. 
The  psalmist  sings  (Psa.  cxix,  105,  111)  : 

A  lamp  to  my  foot  is  thy  word, 

And  a  light  to  my  pathway. 

I  Iiave  taken  possession  of  thy  testimonies  forever, 

For  the  joy  of  my  heart  are  they.' 

The  Apostle  Paul  admonished  Timothy  that  the  Holy  Scriptures 
were  able  to  make  him  wise  unto  salvation  through  faith  in  Jesus 
Christ  (2  Tim.  iii,  15).  And  Jesus  himself,  interceding  for  his  own 
chosen  followers,  prayed,  "  Sanctify  them  in  the  truth  ;  thy  word  is 
truth"  (John  xvii,  IV).  Accordingly,  the  Lord's  ambassador  must 
not  adulterate  (2  Cor.  ii,  17),  but  rightly  divide,  the  word  of  the 
truth  (2  Tim.  ii,  15).  For  if  ever  the  divinely  appointed  ministry 
of  reconciliation  accomplish  the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  and  the 
building  up  of  the  body  of  Christ,  so  as  to  bring  all  to  the  attain- 
ment of  the  unity  of  the  faith  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son  of 
God  (Eph.  iv,  12,  13),  it  must  be  done  by  a  coi'rect  interpreta- 
tion and  efficient  use  of  the  word  of  God.  The  interpretation 
and  application  of  that  word  miist  rest  upon  a  sound  and  self -evi- 
dencing science  of  hermeneutics. 

'  All  scripture  quotations  in  the  present  work  have  been  made  by  translating  direct- 
ly from  the  Hebrew,  Ciialdee,  iind  Greek  originals.  To  have  followed  the  Authorized 
Version  would  have  necessitated  a  large  amount  of  circumlocution.  In  many  instances 
the  citation  of  a  text  is  designed  to  illustrate  a  process  as  well  as  a  principle  of  her- 
meneutics. It  is  often  desirable  to  bring  out,  either  incidentally  or  prominently, 
some  noticeable  emphasis,  and  this  can  be  done  best  by  giving  the  exact  order  of  tlie 
words  of  the  original.  The  observance  of  such  order  in  translation  may  sometimes 
violate  the  usage  and  idiom  of  the  best  English,  but,  in  many  cases,  it  yields  the 
best  possible  translation. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  23 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE  BIBLE  AND  OTHER  SACRED  BOOKS. 

It  is  no  inconsiderable  preparation  for  the  hermeneutical  study  of 
the  Bible  to  be  able  to  appreciate  its  rank  and  value  as  compared 
with  other  sacred  books.  During  the  last  half  century  ^^^^^  religious 
the  learned  research  and  diligent  labour  of  scholars  have  literatures  aval- 
made  accessible  to  us  whole  literatures  of  nations  that  tlon  for^heTme- 
were  comparatively  unknown  before.  It  is  discovered  ^euticai  study. 
that  the  ancient  Egyptians,  the  Persians,  the  Hindus,  the  Chinese, 
and  other  nations,  have  had  their  sacred  writings,  some  of  which 
claim  an  antiquity  greater  than  the  books  of  Moses.  There  are  not 
wanting,  in  Christian  lands,  men  disposed  to  argue  that  these  sacred 
books  of  the  nations  possess  a  value  as  great  as  the  scriptures  of  the 
Christian  faith,  and  are  entitled  to  the  same  veneration.  Such 
claims  are  not  to  be  ignored  or  treated  with  contempt.  There  have 
been,  doubtless,  savage  islanders  who  imagined  that  the  sun  rose 
and  set  for  their  sole  benefit,  and  who  never  dreamed  that  the  sound- 
ing waters  about  their  island  home  were  at  the  same  time  washing 
beautiful  corals  and  precious  pearls  on  other  shores.  Among  civil- 
ized peoples,  also,  there  are  those  who  have  no  appreciation  of  lands, 
nations,  literatures,  and  religions  which  differ  from  their  own.  This, 
however,  is  a  narrowness  unworthy  of  the  Christian  scholar.  The 
truly  catholic  Christian  will  not  refuse  to  acknowledge  the  manifest 
excellences  of  races  or  religions  that  differ  from  his  own.  lie  will 
be  governed  in  his  judgments  by  the  precept  of  the  apostle  (Phil, 
iv,  8) :  "  Whatever  things  are  true,  whatever  things  are  worthy  of 
honour  (oeixva),  whatever  things  are  just,  whatever  things  are  pure, 
whatever  things  are  lovely,  whatever  things  are  of  good  report,  if 
there  be  any  virtue  and  if  there  be  any  praise,  think  upon  (Xoyl^eods, 
exercise  reason  upon)  these  things."  The  study  and  comparison  of 
other  scriptures  will  serve,  among  other  things,  to  show  how  i^re- 
eminently  the  Christian's  Bible  is  adapted  to  the  spiritual  nature 
and  religious  culture  of  all  mankind.* 

'  "  This  volume,"  says  Professor  Phelps,  "  has  never  yet  numbered  among  its  re- 
ligious believers  a  fourth  part  of  the  human  race,  yet  it  has  swayed  a  greater  amount 
of  miud  than  any  other  volume  the  world  has  known.  It  has  the  singular  faculty  of 
attracting  to  itself  the  thinkers  of  the  world,  either  as  friends  or  as  foes,  always  and 
everywhere."     Men  and  Books,  p.  239.  New  York,  1882. 


24  INTRODUCTION   TO 

LiTERATUKE    OF   THE   CHRISTIAN"   CaNON. 

The  scri^otures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  are  the  gradual 
accretion  of  a  literature  that  covers  about  sixteen  centuries.  The 
Outline  of  Bib-  <^ifferent  parts  were  contributed  at  different  times,  and 
licai Literature  \,j  many  different  hands.  According  to  the  order  of 
the"°christiaD  books  in  the  Christian  Canon,  we  have,  first,  the  five 
Canon.  Books  of  Moses,  Avhich  embody  the  Ten  Commandments, 

with  their  various  accessory  statutes,  moral,  civil,  and  ceremonial, 
all  set  in  a  historical  background  of  singular  simplicity  and  gran- 
deur. Then  follow  twelve  Historical  Books,  recording  the  history 
of  the  Israelitish  nation  from  the  death  of  Moses  to  the  restoration 
from  Babylonian  exile,  and  covering  a  period  of  a  thousand  years. 
Next  follow  five  Poetical  Books — a  drama,  a  psalter,  two  books  of 
proverbial  philosophy,  and  a  song  of  love  ;  and  after  these  are  sev- 
enteen Prophetical  Books,  among  which  are  some  of  the  most  mag- 
nificent monuments  of  all  literature.  In  the  New  Testament  we 
have,  first,  the  four  Gospels,  which  record  the  life  and  words  of 
Jesus  Christ ;  then  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  a  history  of  the  origin 
of  the  Christian  Church;  then  the  thirteen  Epistles  of  Paul,  fol- 
lowed by  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  the  seven  General  Epis- 
tles; and,  finally,  the  Apocalypse  of  John.  Hei-e,  at  a  rapid  glance, 
we  see  an  ancient  library  of  history,  law,  theology,  philosophy, 
poetry,  prophecy,  epistles,  and  biography.  Most  of  these  books 
still  bear  their  author's  names,  some  of  whom  we  find  to  have  been 
kings,  some  propliets,  some  shepherds,  some  fishermen.  One  was  a 
taxgatherer,  another  a  tentmaker,  another  a  physician,  but  all  were 
deeply  versed  in  sacred  things.  There  could  have  been  no  collusion 
among  them,  for  they  lived  and  wrote  in  different  ages,  centuries 
apart,  and  their  places  of  residence  were  far  separate,  as  Arabia, 
Palestine,  Babylon,  Persia,  Asia  Minor,  Greece,  and  Rome,"  The 
antiquities  and  varying  civilizations  of  these  different  nations  and 
countries  are  imaged  in  these  sacred  books,  and,  where  the  name  of 
an  author  is  not  known,  it  is  not  difficult  to  ascertain  approximately, 
from  his  statements  or  allusions,  the  time  and  circumstances  of  his 
writing.  The  nation  with  whom  these  books  originated,  and  the 
lands  that  nation  occupied  first  and  last,  are  so  well  known,  and  so 
accurately  identified,  as  to  give  a  living  freshness  and  reality  to 

'  Gelke  sn vs :  "  Scripture  proves  throughout  to  he  only  so  miiny  notes  in  a  divine  har- 
mony wliicli  culminates  in  the  anfrel  gonp;  over  Bethlehem.  What  less  than  Divine  in- 
spiration could  have  evolved  such  unity  of  purpose  and  spirit  in  the  long  series  of  sacred 
writers,  no  one  of  whom  could  possil)ly  ho  conscious  of  the  part  he  was  being  made  to 
take  in  the  development  of  God's  ways  to  our  race  V"    Hours  with  the  IJible,  vol.  i,  p.  5. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  35 

these  records;  and  the  rich  and  varied  contents  of  the  several  books 
are  such  as  to  make  them  of  priceless  value  to  all  men  and  all  ao-es. 
"I  am  of  opinion,"  wrote  Sir  William  Jones — a  most  competent 
judge  on  such  a  subject — "that  this  volume,  independently  of  its 
divine  origin,  contains  more  true  sublimity,  more  exquisite  beauty, 
more  pure  morality,  more  important  history,  and  finer  strains  of 
poetry  and  eloquence,  than  can  be  collected  from  all  other  books, 
in  whatever  age  or  language  they  may  have  been  written.'"  Let 
us  now  compare  and  contrast  these  scriptures  with  the  sacred  books 
of  other  nations. 

The  Avesta. 

No  body  of  sacred  literature  except  the  Christian  Canon  can  be 
of  much  greater  interest  to  the  student  of  history  than  the  scrip- 
tures of  the  Parsees,  which  are  commonly  called  the    ,  ,.    ., 

'  .  .   .     *'  Antiquity  and 

Zend-Avesta,  They  contain  the  traditions  and  cere-  general  char- 
monies  of  the  old  Iranian  faith,  the  religion  of  Zoro-  ^^  ^^' 
aster,  or  (more  propei'ly)  Zarathustra.  They  have  sadly  suffered 
by  time  and  the  revolutions  of  empire,  and  come  to  us  greatly 
mutilated  and  corrupted,  but  since  they  were  first  brought  to  the 
knowledge  of  the  western  world  by  the  enthusiastic  Frenchman, 
Anquetil-Duperron,^  whose  adventures  in  the  East  read  like  a  ro- 
mance from  the  Arabian  Nights,  the  studies  of  European  scholars 
have  \n\t  us  in  possession  of  their  general  scope  and  subject  matter.' 
They  consist  of  four  distinct  sections,  the  Yasna,  the  Vispered,  the 
Vendidad,  and  a  sort  of  separate  hagiographa,  commonly  called 
Khordah-Avesta. 

The  main  principles  of  the  Avesta  religion  are  thus  summed  up 
by  Darmesteter  :  "  The  world,  such  as  it  is  now,  is  two-   p^p^^j^^.^^ 
fold,   beinff  the  work  of   two   hostile  beings,   Ahura-   tem    oi     the 
Mazda,  the  good  principle,  and  Angra-Mainyu,  the  evil 
principle ;  all  that  is  good  in  the  world  comes  from  the  former,  all 

'  Written  on  a  blank  leaf  of  his  Bible. 

^  In  his  work  entitled,  Zend-Avesta,  ouvrage  de  Zoroastre,  contenant  les  Idees  Theo- 
logiques,  Physiques  et  Morales  de  ce  Legislateur,  S  vols..  Par.,  1771. 

^  Especially  deserving  of  mention  are  Eugene  Burnouf,  Cominentaire  sur  le  Yacna, 
3  vols.,  Par.,  1S33 ;  Westergaard,  Zendavesta,  Copenh.,  1852-54;  Spiegel,  who  has 
published  the  original  text,  with  a  full  critical  apparatus,  and  also  a  German  transla- 
tion, with  a  commentary  on  both  the  text  and  translation,  Lpz.,  1853-1 808;  Haug, 
Essays  on  the  Sacred  Language,  Writings,  and  Religion  of  the  Parsees,  Bombay,  1802  ; 
also  Die  Gathas  des  Zarathustra,  Lpz.,  1858;  Windischmann,  Zoroastrische  Studien, 
Berl.,  1803.  An  English  version  of  the  Avesta  from  Spiegel's  German  version,  by 
A.  H.  Bleek,  was  published  in  London,  in  1804,  and  a  better  one  from  the  original 
text,  by  J.  Darmesteter,  (Part  I,  The  Vendidad,  Oxf.,  1880),  as  Vol.  IV,  of  The 
Sacred  Books  of  the  East,  edited  by  Max  Miiller. 


26  INTRODUCTION   TO 

that  is  bad  in  it  comes  from  the  latter.  The  history  of  the  "world 
is  the  history  of  their  conflict,  how  Angra-Mainyu  invaded  the 
world  of  Ahura-Mazda  and  marred  it,  and  how  he  shall  be  expelled 
from  it  at  last.  Man  is  active  in  the  conflict,  his  duty  in  it  being 
laid  before  him  in  the  law  revealed  by  Ahura-Mazda  to  Zarathustra. 
When  the  appointed  time  is  come,  a  son  of  the  lawgiver,  still  un- 
born, named  Saoshyant,  will  appear,  Angra-Mainyu  and  Hell  will  be 
destroyed,  men  will  rise  from  the  dead,  and  everlasting  happiness 
will  reign  over  the  world."  ^ 
The  oldest  portion  of  the  Avesta  is  called  the  Yasna,  which, 
along  with  the  Vispered,  constitutes  the  Parsee  Lit- 
urgy, and  consists  of  praises  of  Ahura-Mazda,  and  all 
the  lords  of  purity,  and  of  invocations  for  them  to  be  present  at 
the  ceremonial  worship.  Many  of  these  prayers  contain  little  more 
than  the  names  and  attributes  of  the  several  objects  or  patrons  of 
the  Zoroastrian  worship,  and  the  perusal  of  them  soon  becomes 
tedious.  The  following  constitutes  the  whole  of  the  twelfth 
chapter,  and  is  one  of  the  finest  passages,  and  a  favourite : 

I  praise  the  well-thought,  well-spoken,  well-performed  thoughts,  words, 
and  works.  I  lay  hold  on  all  good  thoughts,  words,  and  works.  I  aban- 
don all  evil  thoughts,  words,  and  works.  I  bring  to  you,  O  Amesha- 
Sjjentas,"  praise  and  adoration,  with  thoughts,  words,  and  works,  with 
heavenly  mind,  the  vital  strength  of  my  own  body. 

The  following,  from  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  chapter,  is 
another  favourite : 

I  drive  away  the  dsevas  (demons),  I  j^rofess  myself  a  Zarathustrian,  an 
expeller  of  daevas,  a  follower  of  i\.hura,  a  hymn-singer  of  the  Ameslia- 
Spentas,  a  praiser  of  the  Amesha-Spentas.  To  Ahura-Mazda,  the  Good, 
endued  with  good  wisdom,  I  offer  all  good.  To  the  Pure,  Rich,  Majestic; 
whatever  are  the  best  goods  to  him,  to  Avhom  the  cow,  to  whom  purity 
belongs;  from  whom  arises  the  light,  the  brightness  which  is  inseparable 
from  the  lights.  Spenta-Armaiti,  the  good,  choose  I;  may  she  belong  to 
me !     By  my  praise  will  I  save  the  cattle  from  theft  and  robbery. 

The  latter  part  of  the  Yasna  contains  the  religious  hymns  known 
_  as  the  Gathas.     They  are  believed  to  be  the  oldest  por- 

The   G a. thus 

tion  of  the  Avesta,  and  are  written  in  a  more  ancient 
dialect.  But  a  considerable  part  of  them  is  scarcely  intelligible,  all 
the  learning  and  labour  of  scholars  having  thus  far  failed  to  clear  up 

'  Darmesteter,  Translation  of  the  Avesta,  Introduction,  p.  Ivi. 

"  The  Amesha-Spentas,  six  in  number,  were  at  first  mere  personifications  of  virtues 
and  moral  or  liturgical  powers ;  but  as  Ahura-Mazda,  their  lord  and  father,  ruled  over 
the  whole  of  the  world,  they  took  by  and  by  each  a  part  of  the  world  under  their 
care.     Comp,  Darmesteter,  p.  Ixxi. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  27 

the  difficulties  of  the  ancient  text.  The  general  drift  of  thought, 
however,  is  apparent.  Praises  are  continually  addressed  to  the  holy 
powers,  especially  to  the  Holy  Spirit  Ahura-Mazda  (Ormuzd),  the 
Creator,  the  Rejoicer,  the  Pure,  the  Fair,  the  Heavenly,  the  Ruler 
over  all,  the  Most  Profitable,  the  Friend  for  both  worlds.  Many  a 
noble  sentiment  is  uttered  in  these  ancient  hymns,  but,  at  the  same 
time,  a  much  larger  amount  of  frivolous  matter. 

The  Vispered  is  but  a  liturgical  addition  to  the  Yasna,  and  of  sim- 
ilar character.  It  contains  twenty-seven  chapters,  of  The  vispered. 
which  the  following,  from  the  eighth  chapter,  is  a  specimen: 

The  right-spoken  words  praise  we. 

The  holy  Sraosha  praise  we. 

The  good  purity  praise  we. 

Nairo-Sanlia  praise  we. 

The  victorious  i^eaces  praise  we. 

The  undaunted,  who  do  not  come  to  shame,  praise  we. 

The  Fravashis  (souls)  of  the  pure  praise  we. 

The  bridge  Chinvat'  praise  we. 

The  dwelling  of  Ahura-Mazda  praise  we. 

The  best  place  of  the  pure  praise  we, 

Tlie  shining,  wholly  brilliant. 
The  best-arriving  at  Paradise  praise  we. 

The  Vendidad,  consisting  of  twenty-two  chapters,  or  fargards, 
is  of  a  different  character.    It  is  a  minute  code  of  Zoro- 
astrian  laws,  most  of  which,  how^ever,  refer  to  matters  ^"     ^  ' 

of  purification.  The  first  fargard  enumerates  the  countries  which 
were  created  by  Ahura-Mazda,  and  afterward  corrupted  by  the  evil 
principle,  Angra-Mainyu,  who  is  full  of  death  and  opposition  to 
the  good.  The  second  introduces  us  to  Yima,  the  fair,  who  refused 
to  be  the  teacher,  recorder,  or  bearer  of  the  law,  but  became  the 
protector  and  overseer  of  the  world.  Chapter  third  enumerates 
things  which  are  most  acceptable  and  most  displeasing  to  the  world ; 
and  chapter  fourth  describes  breaches  of  contracts  and  other  sins, 
and  prescribes  the  different  degrees  of  punishment  for  each,  declar- 
ing, among  other  things,  that  a  man's  nearest  relatives  may  become 
involved  in  his  2)unishment,  even  to  a  thousandfold.  Chapters  fifth 
to  twelfth  treat  uncleanness  occasioned  by  contact  with  dead  bod- 
ies, and  the  means  of  purification.  Chapters  thirteenth  and  four- 
teenth praise  the  dog,  and  heavy  punishments  are  enjoined  for  those 
who  injure  the  animal  so  important  and  valuable  to  a  pastoral  peo- 
ple.    Fargards  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  give  laws  for  the  treatment  of 

'  Over  which  the  good  are  supposed  to  pass  into  Paradise. 


28  INTRODUCTION   TO 

women,  and  condemn  seduction  and  attempts  to  procure  abortion. 
Fargard  seventeenth  gives  directions  concerning  paring  the  nails 
and  cutting  the  hair.  The  remaining  five  chapters  contain  numer- 
ous conversations  between  Ahura-Mazda  and  Zoroaster,  and  appear 
to  be  fragmentary  additions  to  the  original  Vendidad. 

The  rest  of  the  Parsee  scriptures  are  comprehended  under  -what 
The  Khordah-  ^s  commonly  called  the  Khordah-Avesta,  that  is,  the 
Avesta.  small  Avesta.     This  part  contains  the  Yashts  and  Nya- 

yis,  prayers  and  praises  addressed  to  the  various  deities  of  the 
Zoroastrian  faith ;  also  the  Af erin  and  Afrigan,  praises  and  thanks- 
givings ;  the  Sirozah,  praises  to  the  deities  of  the  thirty  days  of  the 
month;  the  Gahs,  prayers  to  the  different  subdivisions  of  the  day; 
and  the  Patets,  or  formulai'ies  of  confession. 

These  praises  and  prayers  of  the  small  Avesta  are  intended  for 
the  use  of  the  people,  as  those  of  the  Yasna  and  Vispered  are  prin- 
cipally for  the  priests.  Taken  altogether,  these  Parsee  scriptures 
are  a  prayer-book,  or  ritual,  rather  than  a  bible.  But  though  they 
are  associated  with  the  venerable  name  of  Zoroaster,  and  tradition 
has  it  that  he  composed  two  million  verses,  yet  nothing  in  this  vol- 
ume can  with  certainty  be  ascribed  to  him,  and  he  himself  is  a  dim 
and  mythical  personage.  In  all  these  writings  there  is  a  vagueness 
and  uncertainty  about  subject  matter,  date,  and  authorship.  Dar- 
mesteter  says:  "As  the  Parsees  are  the  ruins  of  a  j^eople,  so  are 
their  sacred  books  the  ruins  of  a  religion.  There  has  been  no  other 
great  belief  in  the  world  that  ever  left  such  poor  and  meagre  monu- 
ments of  its  past  splendor." ' 

Assyrian-  Sacred  Records. 

The  cuneiform  inscriptions  on  the  monuments  of  the  Assyrian, 
Vast  range  of  Babylonian,  and  Persian  empires  have  been  found  to 
cmSrm  in^  embody  a  vast  literature,  embracing  history,  law,  sci- 
scriptioas.  encc,  poctry,  and  religion.  To  the  interpretation  of 
these  monumental  records  a  number  of  eminent  orientalists,'  chiefly 
English  and  French,  have  been,  within  the  last  half  century,  devot- 
ing unwearied  study,  and  many  of  the  most  interesting  inscriptions 
have  been  deciphered  and  translated  into  the  languages  of  modern 
Europe.  At  the  date  of  the  earliest  monumental  records,  two  dif- 
ferent races  appear  to  have  settled  upon  the  plains  of  the  Euphrates 
and  Tigris,  one  using  a  Semitic,  the  other  a  Scythian  or  Turanian 

.  *  Translation  of  the  Zond.Avc?ta ;  Introduction,  p.  xii. 

"  Amonj^  the  most  distinguished  Assyriologists  are  Rawlinson,  Ilincks,  Norris,  George 
Smith,  Talbot,  Saycc,  Botta,  Dc  Saulcy,  Oppert,  Lenorinant,  Menant,  and  Schrader. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  29 

language.  They  are  designated  by  the  names  Sumir  and  Akkad, 
but  what  particular  sections  of  the  country  each  inhabited,  or  which 
particular  language  -each  spoke,  does  not  appear.'  They  were, 
probably,  much  intermixed,  as  many  of  their  cities  bear  both  Sem- 
itic and  Scythian  names.  "  The  Accadians,"  says  Sayce,  "  were  the 
inventors  of  the  cuneiform  system  of  writing,  and  the  earliest  pop- 
ulation of  Babylonia  of  whom  we  know.  They  spoke  an  aggluti- 
native language,  allied  to  Finnic  or  Tartar,  and  had  originally  come 
from  the  mountainous  country  to  the  southwest  of  the  Caspian. 
The  name  Accada  signifies  '  highlander,'  and  the  name  of  Accad  is 
met  with  in  the  tenth  chapter  of  Genesis."'  The  successive  Assyr- 
ian, Babylonian,  and  Persian  conquerors  adopted  the  Accadian  sys- 
tem of  writing,  and  it  became  variously  modified  by  each. 

The  inscriptions  thus  far  deciphered  are  mostly  fragmentary,  and 
the  study  of  them  has  not  yet  been  carried  far  enough 

.  Inscriptions  dG* 

to  furnish  a  full  account  of  all  the  tribes  and  languages  ciphered  most- 
they  represent.  But  enough  has  already  been  placed  lyfi^affmentary. 
within  the  reach  of  English  readers  to  show  that  those  ancient  peo- 
ples had  an  extensive  sacred  literature.  Their  prayers  and  hymns 
and  laws  were  graven  on  monumental  tablets,  often  on  the  high 
rocks,  and  they  are  worthy  to  be  compared  "with  the  sacred  books 
of  other  lands  and  nations.' 

The  royal  inscriptions  on  these  monuments  are  noticeable  for  their 
religious  character.     Thousrh  full  of  most  pompous  self       ,.  . 

^  .  °  ^         ^  Religious  tone 

assertion  they  abound  with  devout  acknowledgments,   of  «ie  myai  in- 
showinsT  that  those  ancient  monarchs  never  hesitated  to  ^'''"'P^'^"^- 
confess  their  dependence  on  the  jDOwers  above.     Witness  the  fol- 
lowing inscription  of  Khammurabi,  who  ruled  in  Babylonia  some 
centuries  before  the  time  of  Moses  : 

Khammurabi  the  exalted  king,  the  king  of  Babylon,  the  king  renowned 
throughout  the  world;  conqueror  of  the  enemies  of  Marduk;  the  king  be- 
loved l)y  his  heart  am  T. 

'  "  The  Turanian  people,"  says  George  Smith,  "  who  appear  to  have  been  the  origi- 
nal  inhabitants  of  the  country,  invented  the  cuneiform  mode  of  writing ;  all  the  earli- 
est inscriptions  are  in  that  language,  but  the  proper  names  of  most  of  the  kings  and 
principal  persons  are  written  in  Semitic,  in  direct  contrast  to  the  body  of  the  inscrip- 
tions. The  Semites  appear  to  have  conquered  the  Turanians,  although  they  had  not 
yet  imposed  their  language  on  the  country."     Records  of  the  Past,  vol.  iii,  p.  3. 

'^  Preface  to  his  translation  of  a  Tablet  of  Ancient  Accadian  Laws,  Records  of  the 
Past,  vol.  iii,  p.  21. 

*  A  very  convenient  and  valuable  collection  of  these  inscriptions,  translated  into 
English  by  leading  oriental  scholars,  is  published  by  Bagster  &  Sons,  of  Loudon,  un- 
der the  title  of  Records  of  the  Past  (12  volumes,  18v5-1881).  Every  alternate  volume 
of  the  series  contains  translations  from  the  Egyptian  monuments. 


30  INTRODUCTION  TO 

The  favour  of  god  and  Bel  the  people  of  Sumir  and  Accad  gave  unto  my 
government.     Their  celestial  weapons  unto  my  hand  they  gave. 

The  canal  Khammurabi,  the  joy  of  men,  a  stream  of  abundant  waters, 
for  the  people  of  Sumir  and  Accad,  I  excavated.  Its  banks,  all  of  tliem,  I 
restored  to  newness;  new  supporting  walls  I  heaped  up;  perennial  waters 
for  the  people  of  Sumir  and  Accad  I  provided. 

The  people  of  Sumir  and  Accad,  all  of  them,  in  general  assemblies  I  as- 
semljled.  A  review  and  inspection  of  them  I  ordained  every  year.  In  joy 
and  abundance  I  watched  over  them,  and  in  peaceful  dwellings  I  caused 
them  to  dwell. 

By  the  divine  favour  I  am  Khammurabi  the  exalted  king,  the  worshipper 
of  the  Supreme  deity. 

Witli  the  prosperous  power  which  Marduk  gave  me  I  built  a  lofty  cita- 
del, on  a  high  mound  of  earth,  whose  summits  rose  up  like  mountains,  on 
tlie  banks  of  Khammurabi  river,  the  joy  of  men. 

To  that  citadel  I  gave  the  name  of  the  mother  who  bore  me  and  the 
father  who  begat  me.  In  the  holy  name  of  Ri,  the  mother  who  bore  me, 
and  of  the  father  who  begat  me,  during  long  ages  may  it  last  I ' 

Similar  devout  acknowledgments  are  found  in  nearly  all  the  royal 
annals.  Sargon's  great  inscription  on  the  palace  of  Khorsabad 
declares : 

The  gods  Assur,  Nebo,  and  Merodach  have  conferred  on  me  the  royalty 
of  the  nations,  and  they  have  propagated  the  memory  of  my  fortunate 
name  to  the  ends  of  the  earth.  .  .  .  The  great  gods  have  made  me  happy 
by  tlie  constancy  of  their  affection,  they  have  granted  me  the  exercise  of 
my  sovereignty  over  all  kings.  ^ 

Other  tablets  contain  a  great  variety  of  compositions.  There  are 
SDecimens  of  ^mythological  stories,  fables,  proverbs,  laws,  contracts, 
psalms  and  deeds  of  sale,  lists  of  omens  and  charms,  legends  of 
prajers.  deities  and  spirits,  and  speculations  in  astrology.     Not 

the  least  interesting  among  these  records  are  the  old  Accadian  and 
Assyrian  hymns.  Some  of  these  remind  us  of  the  hymns  of  the 
Rig-Yeda.  Some  have  the  tone  of  penitential  psalms.  The  fol- 
lowing is  one  of  the  best  examples : 

0  my  Lord  I  my  sins  are  many,  my  trespasses  are  great; 
And  the  wrath  of  the  gods  has  plagued  me  with  disease, 
And  with  sickness  and  sorrow. 

1  fainted,  but  no  one  stretched  forth  his  hand; 
I  groaned,  but  no  one  drew  nigh  ; 

I  cried  aloud,  but  no  one  heard. 

'  Translation  by  H.  F.  Talbot,  Records  of  the  Past,  vol.  i,  pp.  7,  8. 
"^  Records  of  the  Past,  vol.  ix,  p.  3. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  31 

O  Lord  !  do  not  abandon  thy  servant. 

In  the  waters  of  the  great  stoi'm  seize  his  hand. 

The  sins  which  he  has  committed,  turn  thou  to  righteousness.* 

The  following  prayer  for  a  king  is  interesting  both  as  an  ex- 
ample of  Assyrian  sacred  poetry,  and  as  evidence  of  a  belief  in 
immortality : 

Length  of  days, 

Long- lasting  years, 

A  strong  sword, 

A  long  life, 

Extended  years  of  glory, 

Pre-eminence  among  kings. 

Grant  ye  to  the  king,  my  lord, 

"Who  has  given  such  gifts  to  his  gods  I 

The  bounds  vast  and  wide 

Of  his  empire  and  of  his  rule 

May  he  enlarge  and  may  he  complete. 

Holding  over  all  kings  supremacy. 

And  royalty  and  empire, 

May  he  attain  to  gray  hairs  and  old  age ; 

And  after  the  life  of  these  days, 

In  the  feasts  of  the  silver  mountain,'' 

The  heavenly  courts. 

The  abode  of  blessedness, 

And  in  the  light  of  the  Happy  Fields, 

May  he  dwell  a  life  eternal,  holy, 

lu  the  presence  of  the  gods 

Who  inhabit  Assyria.^ 

The  following  Chaldean  account  of  the  Creation  is  a  translation, 
by  H.  F.  Talbot,  of  the  first  and  fifth  Creation  Tablets,  chaWean  ac- 
vfhich  are  preserved,  though  in  a  mutilated  condition,  ^0^°  g,^^  ^^^^' 
in  the  British  Museum : 

From  the  First  Tablet. 
When  the  upper  region  was  not  yet  called  heaven, 
And  the  lower  region  was  not  yet  called  earth, 
And  the  abyss  of  Hades  had  not  yet  opened  its  arms, 
Then  the  chaos  of  waters  gave  birth  to  all  of  them. 
And  the  waters  were  gathered  into  one  place. 
No  men  yet  dwelt  together;  no  animals  yet  wandered  about; 

'  Records  of  the  Past,  vol.  ill,  p.  136. 

'  The  Assyrian  Olympus.     The  epithet  silver  was  doubtless  suggested  by  some 
snowy  inaccessible  peak,  the  supposed  dwelling-place  of  the  gods. 
^  Translated  by  Talbot,  Records  of  the  Past,  vol.  iii,  pp.  133,  134. 


32  '  INTRODUCTION   TO 

None  of  the  gods  had  yet  been  born, 

Their  names  were  not  spoken ;  their  attributes  were  not  known. 

Then  tlie  eldest  of  the  gods, 

Lakhmu  and  Lakhanm  were  born, 

And  o-rew  up.   .   .   .  ' 

Assur  and  Kissur  were  born  next, 

And  lived  througli  long  periods. 

Auu.  .  .  .  ^ 

From  the  Fifth  Tablet. 

He  constructed  dwellings  for  the  great  gods. 

He  fixed  up  constellations,  whose  figures  were  like  animals. 

He  made  the  year.     Into  four  quarters  he  divided  it. 

Twelve  months  he  established,   with  their  constellations,  three  by 

three. 
And  for  days  of  the  year  he  appointed  festivals. 
He  made  dwellings  for  the  planets;  for  their  rising  and  setting. 
And  that  nothing  should  go  amiss,  and  tliat  the  course  of  none  should 

Ije  retarded, 
He  placed  with  them  the  dwellings  of  Bel  and  Hea. 
He  opened  great  gates  on  every  side; 

He  made  strong  the  portals,  on  the  left  hand  and  on  the  right. 
In  the  centre  he  placed  luminaries. 
The  moon  he  appointed  to  rule  the  night. 
And  to  wander  tlirough  the  night,  until  the  dawn  of  day. 
Every  month  without  fail  lie  made  holy  assembly  days. 
In  the  beginning  of  the  month,  at  the  rising  of  the  uiglit, 
It  shot  forth  its  liorns  to  illuminate  the  heavens. 
On  the  seventli  day  he  appointed  a  holy  day, 
And  to  cease  from  all  business  lie  commanded. 
Then  arose  the  sun  in  the  horizon  of  heaven  in  (glory).* 

The  mention  here  made  of  the  seventh  day  as  a  holy  day  is  iin- 
portant  to  the  biblical  theologian.  "  It  has  been  known  for  some 
time,"  says  Talbot,  "that  the  Babylonians  observed  the  Sabbath 
with  considerable  strictness.  On  that  day  the  king  was  not  allowed 
to  take  a  drive  in  his  chariot ;  various  meats  were  forbidden  to  be 
eaten,  and  there  were  a  number  of  other  minute  restrictions.  But 
it  was  not  known  that  they  believed  the  Sabbath  to  have  been  or- 
dained at  the  Creation.  I  have  found,  however,  since  this  transla- 
tion of  the  fifth  tablet  was  completed,  that  Mr.  Sayce  has  recently 
published  a  similar  ouinion." 

'  Lacuna;.  "■  Tlic  rest  of  this  tablet  is  lost. 

'Records  of  the  Past,  vol.  ix,  pp.  117,  US.  Compare  the  translation  and  comments 
of  George  Smith,  Chalda;an  Account  of  Genesis.  New  York,  1870.  New  Edition, 
revised,  1880. 


BIBLICAL   HERMETs^EUTICS.  33 

The  following  Accadian  poem  is  supposed  to  be  an  ancient  tradi- 
tion of  the  overthrow  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah.     Mr.    . 

...  Accadian     le- 

Sayce,  whose  translation  is  here  given,  observes  that  gend  of  sodom 

"it  seems  merely  a  fragment  of  a  legend,  in  which  '^^'^^^o^orrah. 
the  names  of  the  cities  were  probably  given,  r.nd  an  explanation 
afforded  of  the  mysterious  personage,  who,  like  Lot,  appears  to 
have  escaped  destruction.  It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the  cam- 
paign of  Chedorlaomer  and  his  allies  was  directed  against  Sodom 
and  the  other  cities  of  the  j^lain,  so  that  the  existence  of  the  legend 
among  the  Accadians  is  not  so  surprising  as  might  ajDpear  at  first 
sight." 

An  overthrow  from  the  midst  of  the  deep  there  came. 

The  fated  punishment  from  the  midst  of  heaven  descended. 

A  storm  like  a  plummet  the  earth  (overwhelmed). 

To  the  four  winds  the  destroying  flood  like  fire  did  burn. 

The  inhabitants  of  the  cities  it  had  caused  to  be  tormented ;  their  bodies 

it  consumed. 
In  city  and  country  it  spread  death,  and  the  flames  as  they  rose  overthrew. 
Freeman  and  slave  were  equal,  and  the  high  places  it  filled. 
In  heaven  and  earth  like  a  thunder-storm  it  had  rained;  a  prey  it  made. 
A  place  of  refuge  the  gods  hastened  to,  and  in  a  throng  collected. 
Its  mighty  (onset)  they  fled  from,  and  like  a  garment  it  concealed  (mankind). 
They  (feared),  and  death  (overtook  them). 

(Their)  feet  and  hands  (it  embraced).  * 

Their  body  it  consumed. 

...     '  the  city,  its  foundation,  it  defiled. 

...     Mn  breath,  his  mouth  he  filled. 
As  for  this  man,  a  loud  voice  was  raised;  the  mighty  lightning  flash  de- 
scended. 
During  the  day  it  flashed  ;  grievously  (it  fell).' 

« 

Similar  to  the  above  in  general  tone  and  character  are  the  cune- 
iform accounts  of  the  Deluge  and  the  Tower  of  Babel.  They  are 
especially  valuable  in  showing  how  the  traditions  of  most  ancient 
events  were  preserved  among  the  scattered  nations,  and  became 
modified  in  the  course  of  ages.  Notably  inferior  are  these  poetic 
legends  to  the  calm  and  stately  narratives  of  the  book  of  Genesis, 
but  they  are,  nevertheless,  to  be  greatly  prized.  Were  Assyriolo- 
gists  to  gather  up,  classify,  and  ai'range  in  proper  order  the  relig- 
ious records  of  ancient  Assyria  and  Babylonia,  it  would  be  seen 
that  these  hoary  annals  and  hymns  of  departed  nations  furnish  a 
sacred  literature  second  in  interest  and  value  to  none  of  the  bibles 
of  the  Gentiles. 

•Lacunae.  *  Records  of  the  Past,  vol.  xi,  pp.  115-118. 


34  INTRODUCTION  TO 


The  Veda. 


The  word  Veda  means  knowledge,  and  is  the  Sanskrit  equivalent 

of  the  Greek  olda,  I  hnoio.     It  is  often  used  to  denote  the  entire 

body  of  Hindu  sacred  literature,  which,  according  to  the  Brahmans, 

contains  pre-eminently  the  knowledge  which  is  important  and  wor- 

,    ^       thv  to  be  known.     But  the  Vedas  proper  exist  chiefly 

General   char-         •'  .  .  . 

acter  of  the  in  the  form  ot  lyrical  poetrj^  and  consist  of  four  dis- 
Vedas.  tinct  Collections  known  as  the   Rig- Veda,  the  Sama- 

Veda,  the  Yajur-Veda,  and  the  Atharva-Veda.  These  hymns  are 
called  Mantras,  as  distinguished  from  the  prose  annotations  and 
disquisitions  (Brahmanas),  which  were  subsequently  added  to  them. 
They  are  written  in  a  dialect  much  older  than  the  classical  San- 
skrit, and  are  allowed  on  all  hands  to  be  among  the  most  ancient 
and  important  monuments  of  literature  extant  in  any  nation  or 
language.  The  four  collections  differ  much,  however,  in  age  and 
value.  The  Rig- Veda  is  the  oldest  and  most  important,  and  con- 
sists of  one  thousand  and  twenty-eight  hymns.  Nearly  half  the 
hymns  are  addressed  to  either  Indra,  the  god  of  light,  or  Agni,  the 
god  of  fire.  According  to  Professor  Whitney,  it  "  is  doubtless  a 
historical  collection,  prompted  by  a  desire  to  treasure  up  comj)lete, 
and  preserve  from  further  corruption,  those  ancient  and  insj^ired 
songs  which  the  Indian  nation  had  brought  with  them,  as  their 
most  precious  possession,  from  the  earlier  seats  of  the  race." '  The 
Sama-Veda  is  a  liturgical  collection,  consisting  largely  of  hj'nins 
from  the  Ilig-Veda,  but  arranged  for  ritual  purposes.  The  Yajur- 
Veda  is  of  a  similar  character,  and  consists  of  various  formulas 
in  prose  and  verse  arranged  for  use  at  sacrificial  services.  The 
Atharva-Veda  is  the  work  o-f  a  later  period,  and  never  attained  in 
India  a  rank  equal  to  that  of  the  other  Vedas.  In  fact,  says  JMax 
-,..,,   ,    Milller,   "for  tracing  the  earliest  growth  of  religious 

Max     Muller  s    .  .  .  *         .  '^  ^ 

views  of  the  ideas  ill  India,  the  only  important,  the  only  real  Veda, 
Rig-Veda.  .g  ^i^g  Rig- Veda.  The  other  so-called  Vedas,  which 
deserve  the  name  of  Veda  no  more  than  the  Talmud  deserves  the 
name  of  Bible,  contain  chiefly  extracts  from  the  Rig-Veda,  together 
with  sacrificial  formulas,  charms,  and  incantations,  many  of  them, 
no  doubt,  extremely  curious,  but  never  likely  to  interest  any  one 
except  the  Sanskrit  scholar  by  profession,"  * 

The  same  distinguished  scholar  elsewhere  obser\'es:  "The  Veda 
has  a  twofold  interest ;  it  belongs  to  the  history  of  the  world  and 

'  Oriental  ami  Linguistic  Studios,  p.  13.     New  York,  1873. 
'  Chips  from  a  German  Workshop,  vol.  i,  p.  8. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  36 

to  the  history  of  India,  In  the  history  of  the  world  the  Veda  fills 
a  gap  which  no  literary  work  in  any  other  language  could  fill. 
It  carries  us  back  to  times  of  which  we  have  no  records  anywhere, 
and  gives  us  the  very  words  of  a  generation  of  men  of  whom  other- 
wise we  could  form  but  the  vaguest  estimate  by  means  of  conjec- 
tures and  inferences.  As  long  as  man  continues  to  take  an  interest 
in  the  history  of  his  race,  and  as  long  as  we  collect  in  libraries  and 
museums  the  relics  of  former  ages,  the  first  place  in  that  long  row 
of  books  which  contains  the  records  of  the  Aryan  branch  of  man- 
kind will  belong  forever  to  the  Rig- Veda."  ' 

Confining  our  observations,  therefore,  to  the  Rig- Veda,  we  note 

that  it  is  in  substance  a  vast  book  of  psalms.     Its  one 

^1  3         J    ^  ^        •    1       1      .        /      ;       ^        .  .  The  RlR-Veda 

thousand  and  twenty-eight  lyrics  {suktas),  of  various   a  vast  book  of 

length,  are  divided  into  ten  books  {mandalas,  circles),  p^^^I'^^- 
and  together  constitute  a  work  about  eight  times  larger  than  the 
one  hundred  and  fifty  Psalms  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  first 
book  is  composed  of  one  hundred  and  ninety-one  hymns,  ^vliich  are 
ascribed  to  some  fifteen  different  authors  {rlshis).  The  second 
book  contains  forty-three  hymns,  all  of  which  are  attributed  to 
Gritsamada  and  his  family.  The  next  five  books  are  also  ascribed 
each  to  a  single  author  or  his  family,  and  vary  in  the  number  of 
their  hymns  from  sixty-two  to  one  hundred  and  four.  The  eighth 
book  has  ninety-two  hymns,  attributed  to  a  great  nura-  variety  of  vm- 
ber  of  different  authors,  a  majority  of  whom  are  of  the  *^^^^- 
race  of  Kanva.  The  ninth  book  is  also  ascribed  to  various  authors, 
and  has  one  hundred  and  fourteen  hymns,  all  of  which  are  addressed 
to  Soma  as  a  god.  "The  name  Soma,"  says  Grassmann,  "is  derived 
from  a  root,  su,  which  originally  meant  'to  beget,'  'to  produce,' 
but  in  the  Rig- Veda  is  a2:)plied  altogether  to  the  extracting  and 
pressing  of  the  plant  used  for  the  preparation  of  soma,  and  the 
soma  itself  therefore  meant  originally  the  juice  obtained  by  this 
procedure,'"'  The  tenth  book,  like  the  first,  contains  one  hundred 
and  ninety-one  hymns ;  but  they  wear  a  different  style,  breathe  a 
different  spirit,  and  appear  to  belong  to  a  much  later  period.  "  We 
find,"  says  Grassmann,  "  in  this,  as  in  the  first  book,  songs  belong- 
ing to  the  springtime  of  vedic  poesy,  but  also  songs  belonging  to  a 
time  not  very  remote,  as  the  time  of  the  most  recent  period  of  vedic 
lyrics,  such  as  presents  itself  to  us  in  the  Atharva-Veda."  ^ 

1  History  of  Ancient  Sanskrit  Literature.    Second  Edition,  p.  63.     Lond.,  18C0. 

"^  Grassmann's  Rig-Veda.  Metrical  Version  in  German,  with  Critical  and  Explan- 
atory Annotations  (2  vols.  Lpz.,  1876,  1877).  Preface  to  Ninth  Book,  vol.  iif 
p.  183. 

3  Rig- Veda.     Preface  to  Tenth  Book,  vol.  ii,  p.  288. 


36  INTRODUCTION   TO 

Our  limits  will  allow  its  to  present  only  a  few  specimens,  but 
Specimens  of  these  will  suffice  to  show  the  general  character  and 
vedic  Hymns,  g^-yje  of  the  best  Rig-Veda  hymns.  The  following  is 
Max  Miiller's  translation  of  the  fifty-third  hymn  of  the  first  book, 
and  is  addressed  to  Indra  : 

1.  Keep  silence  well!  we  oflfer  praises  to  the  great  Indra  in  the  house  of 
the  saciificer.  Does  he  find  treasure  for  those  who  are  like  sleepers? 
Mean  praise  is  not  valued  among  the  munificent. 

2.  Thou  art  the  giver  of  horses,  Indra,  thou  art  the  giver  of  cows,  the 
giver  of  corn,  the  strong  lord  of  wealth;  the  old  guide  of  man,  disappoint- 
ing no  desires,  a  friend  to  friends: — to  him  we  address  this  song. 

3.  O  powerful  Indra,  achiever  of  many  works,  most  brilliant  god — all 
this  wealth  around  here  is  known  to  be  thine  alone :  take  from  it,  conqueror, 
bring  it  hither  1  do  not  stint  the  desire  of  the  worshipper  who  longs  for 
thee ! 

4.  On  these  days  thou  art  gracious,  and  on  these  nights,  keeping  off  the 
enemy  from  our  cows  and  from  our  stud.  Tearing  the  fiend  night  after 
night  with  the  help  of  Indra,  let  us  rejoice  in  food,  freed  from  haters. 

5.  Let  us  rejoice,  Indra,  in  treasure  and  food,  in  wealth  of  manifold  de- 
light and  splendor.  Let  us  rejoice  in  the  blessing  of  the  gods,  wliich  gives 
us  the  strength  of  offspring,  gives  us  cows  first  and  horses. 

6.  These  draughts  inspired  thee,  O  lord  of  the  brave !  these  were  vigour, 
these  libations,  in  battles,  when  for  the  sake  of  the  poet,  the  sacrificer, 
thou  struckest  down  irresistibly  ten  thousands  of  enemies. 

7.  From  battle  to  battle  thou  advancest  bravely,  from  town  to  town  thou 
destroyest  all  this  with  might,  when  thou,  Indra,  with  Nami  as  thy  friend, 
struckest  down  from  afar  the  deceiver  Namuki. 

8.  Thou  hast  slain  Karnaga  and  Parnaya  with  the  brightest  spear  of 
Atithigva.  Without  a  helper  thou  didst  demolish  the  hundred  cities  of 
Vangrida,  which  were  besieged  by  Rigisvan. 

9.  Thou  hast  felled  down  with  the  chariot- wheel  these  twenty  kings  of 
men,  who  had  attacked  the  friendless  Susravas,  and  gloriously  the  sixty 
thousand  and  ninety-nine  forts. 

10.  Thou,  Indra,  hast  succoured  Susravas  with  thy  succours,  Turvayana 
with  thy  protections.  Thou  hast  made  Kutsa,  Atithigva,  and  Ayu  subject 
to  tliis  mighty  youthful  king. 

11.  "We  who  in  future,  protected  by  the  gods,  wish  to  be  thy  most 
blessed  friends,  we  shall  praise  thee,  blessed  by  thee  with  offspring,  and 
enjoying  henceforth  a  longer  life.' 

The  following  is  a  translation,  by  W.  D.  Whitney,  of  the  eight- 
eenth hymn  of  the  tenth  book.  It  furnishes  a  vivid  portraiture  of 
the  proceedings  of  an  ancient  Hindu  burial,  and  holds  even  at  the 
present  day  an  important  place  among  the  funeral  ceremonies  of  the 
Hindus.     The  officiating  priest  thus  speaks : 

'  Chips  from  a  German  Workshop,  vol.  i,  pp.  30-33. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  37 

1.  Go  forth,  O  Death,  upon  a  distant  pathway, 

one  that's  thine  own,  not  that  the  jifods  do  travel; 
I  speak  to  thee  who  eyes  and  ears  possessest ; 

harm  not  our  children,  harm  thou  not  our  heroes. 

2.  Ye  who  death's  foot  have  clogged'  ere  ye  came  hither, 

your  life  and  vigour  longer  yet  retaining, 
Sating  yourselves  with  progeny  and  riches, 

clean  be  ye  now,  and  purified,  ye  oflFerers ! 

3.  These  have  come  here,  not  of  the  dead,  but  living; 

our  worship  of  the  gods  hath  been  propitious; 
We've  onward  gone  to  dancing  and  to  laughter, 

our  life  and  vigour  longer  yet  retaining.* 

4.  This  fix  I  as  protection  for  the  living;  ^ 

may  none  of  them  depart  on  that  same  errand ; 
Long  may  they  live,  a  hundred  numerous  autumns, 

'twixt  death  and  them  a  mountain  interposing. 

5.  As  day  succeeds  to  day  in  endless  series, 

as  seasons  happily  move  on  with  seasons, 
As  each  that  passes  lacks  not  its  successor, 

so  do  thou  make  their  lives  move  on,  Creator  I 

6.  Ascend  to  life,  old  age  your  portion  making, 

each  after  each,  advancing  in  due  order;* 
May  Twashter,  skilful  fashioner,  propitious, 

cause  that  you  here  enjoy  a  long  existence. 

7.  These  women  here,  not  widows,  blessed  with  husbands, 

may  deck  themselves  with  ointment  and  with  perfume; 
Unstained  by  tears,  adorned,  untouched  with  sorrow, 
the  wives  may  first  ascend  unto  the  altar. 

8.  Go  up  unto  the  world  of  life,  O  woman ! 

thou  liest  by  one  whose  soul  is  fled ;  come  hither  1 
To  him  who  grasps  thy  hand,^  a  second  husband, 

thou  art  as  wife  to  spouse  become  related. 

'  Allusion  to  the  custom  of  attaching  a  clog  to  the  foot  of  the  corpse,  as  if  thereby 
to  secure  the  attendants  at  the  burial  from  harm. 

2  The  friends  of  the  deceased  seem  to  have  no  idea  of  soon  sharing  his  fate ;  they 
desire  to  banish  the  thought  of  death. 

2  The  officiating  priest  drew  a  circle  and  set  a  stone  between  it  and  the  grave,  to 
symbolize  the  barrier  which  he  would  fain  establish  between  the  living  and  the  dead. 

*  Addressed  to  the  attendants,  who  hereupon  left  their  places  about  the  bier,  and 
went  up  into  the  circle  marked  off  for  the  living.  First  the  men  went  up,  then  the 
wives,  and  finally  the  widow. 

'  The  person  who  led  the  widow  away  was  usually  a  brother-in-law,  or  a  foster  child. 


38  INTRODUCTION  TO 

9.  The  bow  from  out  the  dead  man's  hand  now  taking/ 

that  ours  may  be  the  glory,  honour,  prowess — 
Mayest  thou  there,  we  liere,  rich  in  retainers, 

vanquish  our  foes  and  them  that  plot  against  us. 

10.  Approach  thou  now  the  lap  of  earth,  tliy  mother, 

the  wide-extending  earth,  the  ever-kindly ; 
A  maiden  soft  as  wool  to  him  who  comes  with  gifts, 

she  shall  protect  thee  from  destruction's  bosom. 

11.  Open  thyself,  O  earth,  and  press  not  heavily; 

1^  easy  of  access  and  of  approach  to  him ; 
As  mother  with  her  robe  her  child, 

so  do  thou  cover  him,  O  earth ! 

13.  May  earth  maintain  herself  thus  opened  v/ide  for  him; 

a  thousand  props  shall  give  support  about  him; 
And  may  those  mansions  ever  drip  with  fatness; 

may  they  be  there  for  evermore  his  refuge. 

13.  Fortl)  from  about  thee  thus  I  build  away  the  ground; 

as  I  lay  down  this  clod  may  I  receive  no  harm; 
This  pillar  may  the  Fathers  here  maintain  for  thee ; 

may  Yama  there  provide  for  thee  a  dwelling. 

We  add  a  single  specimen  more,  a  metrical  version  of  the  one 
handred  and  twenty-ninth  hymn  of  the  tenth  book,  which  is  espe- 
cially interesting  as  being  full  of  profound  speculation.  "In  judg- 
ing it,"  says  Max  Miiller,  "  we  should  bear  in  mind  that  it  was  not 
written  by  a  gnostic  or  by  a  pantheistic  philosopher,  but  by  a  poet 
who  felt  all  these  doubts  and  problems  as  his  own,  without  any 
wish  to  convince  or  to  startle,  only  uttering  what  had  been  weigh- 
ing on  his  mind,  just  as  later  poets  would  sing  the  doubts  and  sor- 
rows of  their  heart." 

Nor  Aught  nor  Naught  existed;  yon  bright  sky 

Was  not.  nor  heaven's  broad  woof  outstretched  above. 

What  covered  all?  what  sheltered?  what  concealed? 

Was  it  the  water's  fathomless  abyss? 

Tiiere  was  not  death — yet  was  there  naught  immortal, 

There  was  no  confine  betwixt  day  and  night; 

*  TJp  to  the  moment  of  interment  a  bow  was  carried  in  the  hand  of  the  deceased. 
This  was  at  last  taken  away  to  signify  that  his  life-work  was  now  done,  and  to  others 
remained  the  plory  of  conquests.  Tlie  body  was  then  tenderly  committed  to  the  earth. 
Compare  Whitney's  annotation.s  on  this  hymn,  and  hi.s  essay  on  the  Vedic  Doctrine  of 
a  Future  Life  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  April,  1859,  and  also  in  his  Oriental  and 
Linguistic  Studies,  pp.  46-63.     New  York,  1873. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  39 

The  only  One  breathed  breathless  by  itself, 
Other  than  It  there  nothing  since  has  been. 
Darkness  there  was,  and  all  at  first  was  veiled 
In  gloom  profound — an  ocean  without  light — 
The  germ  that  still  lay  covered  in  the  husk 
Burst  forth,  one  nature,  from  the  fervent  heat. 
Then  first  came  love  upon  it,  the  new  spring 
Of  mind — yea,  poets  in  their  hearts  discerned, 
Pondering,  this  bond  between  created  things 
And  uncreated.     Comes  this  spark  from  earth 
Piercing  and  all-pervading,  or  from  heaven? 
Then  seeds  were  sown,  and  mighty  powers  arose — 
Nature  below,  and  power  and  will  above — 
Who  knows  the  secret?   who  proclaimed  it  here, 
Wlience,  whence  this  manifold  creation  sprang? 
The  gods  themselves  came  later  into  being — 
Who  knows  from  whence  this  great  cre;ition  sprang? 
He  from  whom  all  this  great  creation  came, 
Whether  his  will  created  or  was  mute, 
The  Most  High  Seer  that  is  in  highest  heaven. 
He  knows  it — or  perchance  even  He  knows  not.' 

Every  discerning  reader  must  note  the  polytheistic  teachings  of 
the  Veda.  Mr.  Hardwick  calls  attention  to  this  in  the  following 
remarks:  "If  we  lay  aside  expressions  in  the  vedic  hymns  which 
have  occasionally  transferred  the  attributes  of  power  ^^  ^^^^^ 
and  omnipresence  to  some  one  elemental  deity,  as  In-  mainly  poiy- 
dra,  for  example,  and  by  so  doing  intimated  that,  even  ^^^i^tic. 
in  the  depths  of  nature- worship,  intuitions  pointing  to  one  great  and 
all-embracing  Spirit  could  not  be  extinguished,  there  are  scarcely  a 
dozen  'mantras'  in  the  whole  collection  where  the  unity  of  God  is 
stated  with  an  adequate  amount  of  firmness  and  consistency.  The 
great  mass  of  those  productions  either  invoke  the  aid,  or  deprecate 
the  wrath  of  multitudinous  deities,  who  elsewhere  are  regarded  as 
no  more  than  finite  emanations  from  the  'lord  of  the  creatures;' 
and  therefore  in  the  sacred  books  themselves  polytheism  was  the 
feature  ever  prominent,  and,  what  is  more  remarkable,  was  never 
openly  repudiated."  * 

'  Chips  from  a  German  Workshop,  vol.  i,  pp.  '76,  77. 

*  Christ  and  other  Masters,  p.  184.  Compare  Introduction  to  the  several  volumes 
of  Wilson's  Translation  of  the  Rig- Veda,  and  Colebrook's  Essay  on  the  Vedas,  first 
published  in  the  Asiatic  Researches,  and  later  in  his  collected  works.  Lond.,  1873. 
On  the  translation  and  interpretation  of  the  Veda,  see  Muir,  in  Journal  of  the  Royal 
Asiatic  Society  (Lond.,  1866),  and  Whitney,  in  the  North  American  Review  (1868); 
also  in  his  Oriental  and  Linguistic  Studies,  pp.  100-132. 


40  INTRODUCTION  TO 

The  Buddhist  CANOif. 

Buddhism  in  India  was  a  revolt  from  Brahmanism.  Its  founder 
Life  and  influ-   Avas  Sakya-muni,  sometimes  called  Gautama,  being  of 

ence  of  sakya-  ^j^g  family  of  the  Sakyas,  and  the  clan  of  the  Gautamas, 

auni,  or  Bud-  •'  ,  .     "^  . 

dha.  and  belonging  by  birth  to  the  warrior  class  (Kshatriya). 

Stripping  the  story  of  his  life  of  the  numerous  fables  and  supersti- 
tious legends  of  later  times,  it  would  appear  that  this  distinguished 
child  of  the  Sakyas  grew  up  a  beautiful  and  accomplished  youth, 
but  took  no  interest  in  the  common  amusements  of  the  young,  and 
gave  himself  much  to  solitude  and  meditation.  The  problems  of 
life  and  death  and  human  suffering  absorbed  his  inmost  being.  He 
at  length  forsook  parents  and  wife  and  home,  and,  after  years  of 
study,  penances,  and  austere  self-denial,  attained  the  conviction 
that  he  must  go  forth  among  men  as  an  Enlightener  and  Reformer. 
Max  Miiller  says :  "  After  long  meditations  and  ecstatic  visions,  he 
at  last  imagined  that  he  had  arrived  at  that  true  knowledge  which 
discloses  the  cause  and  thereby  destroys  the  fear  of  all  the  changes 
inherent  in  life.  It  was  from  the  moment  when  he  arrived  at  this 
knowledge  that  he  claimed  the  name  of  Buddha,  the  Enlightened. 
At  that  moment  we  may  truly  say  that  the  fate  of  millions  of  mill- 
ions of  human  beings  trembled  in  the  balance.  Buddha  hesitated 
for  a  time  whether  he  should  keep  his  knowledge  to  himself,  or 
communicate  it  to  the  world.  Compassion  for  the  sufferings  of 
man  prevailed,  and  the  young  prince  became  the  founder  of  a 
religion  which,  after  more  than  2000  years,  is  still  professed  by 
455,000,000  of  human  beings."  ' 

Sakya-muni's  life,  according  to  the  best  authorities,  extended 
Buddha  a  Re-  over  the  latter  part  of  the  sixth  and  the  first  half  of  the 
former.  fifth  century  before  Christ.     He  broke  with  Brahman- 

ism from  the  first,  and  pronounced  himself  against  the  Vedas,  the 
system  of  caste,  and  sacrifices.  How  far  Kapila's  system  of  the 
Sankhya  philosophy  may  have  been  a  preparation  for  Buddhism  is  a 
question,''  but  that  Buddha  became  a  mighty  reformer,  and  that  his 
system  almost  succeeded  for  a  time  in  overthro\Wng  Brahmanism  in 
India,  are  matters  of  history.  "  The  human  mind  in  Asia,"  observes 
J.  F.  Clarke,  "went  through  the  same  course  of  experience  after- 
ward repeated  in  Europe.  It  protested,  in  the  interest  of  humanity, 
against  the  oppression  of  a  priestly  caste.  Brahmanism,  like  the 
Church  of  Rome,  established  a  system  of  sacramental  salvation  in 

'  Essay  on  Buddhism,  in  Chips  from  a  German  Workshop,  vol.  i,  p.  211. 
^  Comp.  Hard  wick,  Christ  and  other  Masters,  pp.  147-169  ;  and  Miillcr's  Chips  from 
a  German  Workshop,  vol.  i,  pp.  222-226, 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  41 

the  hands  of  a  sacred  order.  Buddhism,  like  Protestantism,  re- 
volted, and  established  a  doctrine  of  individual  salvation  based  on 
personal  character.  Brahmanism,  like  the  Church  of  Rome  teaches 
an  exclusive  spiritualism,  glorifying  penances  and  martyrdom  and 
considers  the  body  the  enemy  of  the  soul.  But  Buddhism  and 
Protestantism  accept  nature  and  its  laws,  and  make  a  relioion  of 
humanity  as  well  as  of  devotion.  To  such  broad  statements  numer- 
ous exceptions  may  doubtless  be  always  found,  but  these  are  the 
large  lines  of  distinction."  ' 

The  sacred .  scriptures  of  Buddhism  are  commonly  called  the 
Tripitaka,  which  means  the  "  three  baskets,"  or  three  compilation  of 
collections  of  religious  documents.  Buddha,  like  Jesus,  t^e  Tripitaka. 
left  no  written  statement  of  his  teachings ;  but  very  soon  after  his 
death,  accordmg  to  tradition,  a  great  council  was  called  (about 
B.  C.  477),  at  whioh  the  sayings  of  the  great  master  were  written 
down  with  care,  A  hundi-ed  years  later  another  council  assembled, 
to  consider  and  correct  certain  deviations  from  the  original  faith. 
But  it  was  probably  not  until  a  third  council,  convened  by  King 
Asoka  about  B.  C.  242,  that  the  Buddhist  canon  in  its  present  form 
was  completed.''  At  that  great  council  King  Asoka,  "the  Indian 
Constantino,"  admonished  the  members  of  the  assembly  "that  what 
had  been  said  by  Buddha,  that  alone  was  well  said;"  and  at  the 
same  time  he  provided  for  the  projDagation  of  Buddhism  by  mis- 
sionary enterprise.  And  it  is  worthy  of  note  that,  as  Christianity 
originated  among  the  Jews,  but  has  had  its  chief  triumphs  among 
the  Gentiles,  so  Buddhism  ox'iginated  among  the  Hindus,  but  has 
won  most  of  its  adherents  among  other  tribes  and  nations. 

The  Tripitaka,  as  we  now  possess  it,  consists  of  the  Vinaya- 
Pitaka,  devoted  to  ethics  and  discipline;  the  Sutra-  ^^^^^^^^^  ^^^ 
Pitaka,  containing  the  Sutras,  or  discourses  of  Buddha;  magnitude  of 
and  the  Abhidharma-Pitaka,  which  treats  of  dogmatical  "'*^  Tripitaka. 
philosophy  and  metaphysics.'  The  entire  collection  constitutes  an 
immense  body  of  literature,  rivaling  in  magnitude  all  that  was  ever 
included  under  the  title  of  Yeda.  It  is  said  to  contain  29,368,000 
letters,  or  more  than  seven  times  the  number  contained  in  our  Eng- 
lish Bible.  The  Tibetan  edition  of  the  Tripitaka  fills  about  three 
hundred  and  twenty-five  folio  volumes.  The  mere  titles  of  the 
divisions,  sub-divisions,  and  chapters  of  this  Buddhist  canon  would 
cover  several  pages.     The  greater  portion  of  this  immense  litera- 

J  Ten  Great  Religions,  pp.  142,  143.     Boston,  1871. 

*  See  Oldenberg's  Introduction  to  the  Vinaya-Pitaka,  and  Miiller's  Introduction  to 
the  Dhammapada,  in  vol.  x,  of  Sacred  Books  of  the  East. 

^  Comp.  Chapter  xviir  of  Spence  Hardy,  Eastern  Monachism.     Lond.,  1850. 


43  INTRODUCTION  TO 

ture,  in  its  most  ancient  texts,  exists  as  yet  only  in  manuscript. 
But  as  Buddhism  spread  and  triumphed  mightily  in  southern  and 
eastern  Asia,  its  sacred  books  have  been  translated  into  Pali,  Bur- 
mese, Siamese,  Tibetan,  Chinese,  and  other  Asiatic  tongues.  In 
fact,  every  important  nation  or  tribe,  which  has  adopted  Buddhism, 
appears  to  have  a  more  or  less  complete  Buddhist  literature  of  its 
own,  and  the  names  of  the  different  books  and  treatises  vary  accord- 
in  ^t  to  the  lanwuaffes  in  which  they  are  extant.'  Amid  the  multi- 
plicity  of  texts  and  versions  it  is  impossible  now  to  point  with  con- 
fidence to  any  authoritative  original ;  but  the  form  of  the  canon  as 
it  exists  among  the  Southern  Buddhists,  and  especially  in  the  Pali 
texts,  is  esteemed  most  highly  by  scholars. 

The  fundamental  doctrines  of  Buddhism  are  few  and  simple,  and, 
^.    .    ,  ^       in  substance,  may  be  briefly  stated  as  consisting  of  the 

Principal  doe-  '  j  J  ■         /-^ 

trines  of  Bud-  Four  Verities,  the  Eightfold  Path,  and  the  Five  Com- 
dhism.  mandments.    The  Four  sublime  Verities  are,  (1)  All  ex- 

istence, being  subject  to  change  and  decay,  is  evil.  (2)  The  source 
of  all  this  evil  and  consequent  sorrow  is  desire.  (3)  Desire  and  the 
evil  which  follows  it  may  be  made  to  cease,  (i)  There  is  a  fixed 
and  certain  way  by  which  to  attain  exemption  from  all  evil.  The 
Eightfold  Path  consists  of  (1)  Right  Belief,  (2)  Right  Judgment, 
(3)  Right  Utterance,  (4)  Right  Motives,  (5)  Right  Occupation, 
(6)  Right  Obedience,  (7)  Right  Memory,  and  (8)  Right  Meditation. 
The  Five  Commandments  are,  (1)  Do  not  kill;  (2)  Do  not  steal; 
(3)  Do  not  lie;  (4)  Do  not  become  intoxicated;  (5)  Do  not  commit 
adultery.  There  are  also  five  other  well-known  precepts,  which 
have  not,  however,  the  grade  of  the  commandments,  namely,  (1)  Do 
not  take  solid  food  after  noon;  (2)  Do  not  visit  scenes  of  amuse- 
ment; (3)  Do  not  use  ornaments  or  perfumery  in  dress;  (4)  Do  not 
use  luxurious  beds;  (5)  Do  not  accept  gold  or  silver.'* 
Specimens  of  Bud-  T'^©  following  passage  from  the  first  chapter  of  the 
dha-s  discourses.  Maha-Parinibbana-Sutta,  one  of  the  subdivisions  of 
the  Sutra-Pitaka,  is  a  specimen  of  the  discourses  of  Buddha : 

And  tlie  Blessed  One  arose,  and  went  to  the  Service  Hall ;  and  when  he 
was  seated,  he  addressed  the  bretliren,  and  said : 

"I  will  teach  you,  O  mendicants,  seven  conditions  of  the  welfare  of  a 
community.     Listen  well  and  attend,  and  I  will  speak." 

1  Thus  the  Sanskrit  name  Tripitaka  becomes  Tipltaka  and  Pitakattaya  in  Pali,  and  Tun- 
pitaka  in  Singhalese.    Buddhism  itself  becomes  Foism  in  China,  and  Lamaism  in  Thibet. 

-  For  an  extensive  presentation  of  tlie  doctrines  and  usages  of  Ruddliism,  see  Spence 
Uardy,  Eastern  Monachisni ;  also  liis  Manual  of  Buddhism,  New  Edition,  Lond.,  1880. 
Edwin  Arnold  has  beautifully  expressed  in  poetical  form  the  leading  doctrines  of 
Buddha,  in  the  eiglith  book  of  his  Light  of  Asia.  , 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  43 

"Even  so,  Lord,"  said  the  Brethren,  in  assent,  to  the  Blessed  One;  and 
he  spake  as  follows : 

"  So  long,  O  mendicants,  as  the  brethren  meet  together  in  full  and  fre- 
quent assemblies — so  long  as  they  meet  together  in  concord,  and  rise  in 
concord,  and  carry  out  in  concord  the  duties  of  the  order — so  long  as  the 
brethren  shall  establish  nothing  that  has  not  been  already  prescribed,  and 
abrogate  nothing  that  has  been  already  established,  and  act  in  accordance 
with  the  rules  of  the  order  us  now  laid  down — so  long  as  the  brethren  hon- 
our and  esteem  and  revere  and  support  the  elders  of  experience  and  long 
standing,  the  fathers  and  leaders  of  the  order,  and  hold  it  a  point  of  duty 
to  hearken  to  their  words — so  long  as  the  brethren  fall  not  under  the  influ- 
ence of  that  craving  which,  springing  up  within  them,  would  give  lise  to 
renewed  existence— so  long  as  the  brethren  delight  in  a  life  of  solitude— so 
long  as  the  brethren  so  train  their  minds  that  good  and  holy  men  shall 
come  to  them,  and  those  who  have  come  shall  dw^ell  at  ease — so  long  may 
the  brethren  be  expected  not  to  decline,  but  to  prosper. 

"So  long  as  these  seven  conditions  shall  continue  to  exist  among  the 
brethren,  so  long  as  they  are  -well  instructed  in  these  conditions,  so  long 
may  the  brethren  be  expected  not  to  decline,  but  to  prosper." 

"  Other  seven  conditions  of  welfare  will  I  teach  you,  O  brethren.  Listen 
well,  and  attend,  and  I  will  speak." 

And  on  their  expressing  their  assent,  he  spake  as  follows: 

''  So  long  as  the  brethren  shall  not  engage  in,  or  be  fond  of,  or  be  con- 
nected with  business — so  long  as  the  brethren  shall  not  be  in  the  habit  of, 
or  be  fond  of,  or  be  partakers  in  idle  talk — so  long  as  the  brethren  shall 
not  be  addicted  to,  or  be  fond  of,  or  indulge  in  slothf ulness — so  long  as  the 
brethren  shall  not  frequent,  or  be  fond  of,  or  indulge  in  society— so  long 
as  the  brethren  shall  neither  have,  nor  fall  under  the  influence  of,  sinful 
desires — so  long  as  the  brethren  shall  not  become  the  friends,  companions, 
or  intimates  of  sinners — so  long  as  the  brethren  shall  not  come  to  a  stop  on 
their  way  [to  Nirvana]  because  they  have  attained  to  any  lesser  thing— so 
long  may  the  brethren  be  expected  not  to  decline,  but  to  prosper. 

'•So  long  as  these  conditions  shall  continue  to  exist  among  the  brethren, 
so  long  as  they  are  instructed  in  these  conditions,  so  long  may  the  brethren 
be  expected  not  to  decline,  but  to  prosper." 

"  Other  seven  conditions  of  welfare  will  I  teach  you,  0  brethren.  Listen 
w-ell,  and  attend,  and  I  will  speak." 

And  on  their  expressing  their  assent,  he  spake  as  follows: 

"  So  long  as  the  brethren  shall  be  full  of  faith,  modest  in  heart,  afraid 
of  sin,  full  of  learning,  strong  in  energy,  active  in  mind,  and  full  of  wis- 
dom, so  long  may  the  bretliren  be  expected  not  to  decline,  but  to  prosper, 

"  So  long  as  these  conditions  shall  continue  to  exist  among  the  brethren, 
so  long  as  they  are  instructed  in  these  conditions,  so  long  may  the  brethren 
be  expected  not  to  decline,  but  to  prosper." 

"  Other  seven  conditions  of  welfare  will  I  teach  you,  O  brethren.  Listen 
well,  and  attend,  and  I  will  speak." 

And  on  their  expressing  their  assent,  he  spake  as  follows: 

"  So  long  as  the  brethren  shall  exercise  themselves  in  the  sevenfold  higher 


44  INTRODUCTION  TO 

■wisdom,  that  is  to  say,  in  mental  activity,  search  after  truth,  energy,  joy, 
peace,  earnest  contemplation,  and  equanimity  of  mind,  so  long  may  the 
brethren  be  expected  not  to  decline,  but  to  prosper. 

"  So  long  as  these  conditions  shall  continue  to  exist  among  the  brethren, 
so  long  as  they  are  instructed  in  these  conditions,  so  long  may  the  brethren 
be  expected  not  to  decline,  but  to  prosper." 

"  Other  seven  conditions  of  welfare  will  I  teach  you,  O  brethren.  Listen 
well,  and  attend,  and  I  will  speak." 

And  on  their  expressing  their  assent,  he  spake  as  follows : 

*'So  lono-  as  the  brethren  shall  exercise  themselves  in  the  sevenfold  per- 
ception due  to  earnest  thought,  that  is  to  say,  the  perception  of  iraperma- 
nency,  of  non-individuality,  of  corruption,  of  the  danger  of  sin,  of  sanctifica- 
tion,  of  purity  of  heart,  of  Nirvana,  so  long  may  the  brethren  be  expected 
not  to  decline,  but  to  prosper. 

"  So  long  as  these  conditions  shall  continue  to  exist  among  the  brethren, 
so  long  as  they  are  instructed  in  these  conditions,  so  long  may  the  brethren 
be  expected  not  to  decline,  but  to  prosper." 

"  Six  conditions  of  welfare  will  I  teach  you,  O  brethren.  Listen  well, 
and  attend,  and  I  will  speak." 

And  on  their  expressing  their  assent,  he  spake  as  follows: 

*'  So  long  as  the  brethren  shall  persevere  in  kindness  of  action,  speech, 
and  thought  among  the  saints,  both  in  public  and  in  private — so  long  as 
they  shall  divide  without  partiality,  and  share  in  common  with  the  up- 
right and  the  holy,  all  such  things  as  they  receive  in  accordance  with  the 
just  provisions  of  the  order,  down  even  to  the  mere  contents  of  a  begging 
bowl — so  long  as  the  brethren  shall  live  among  the  saints  in  the  practice, 
both  in  public  and  in  private,  of  those  virtues  which  (unbroken,  intact,  un- 
spotted, unblemished)  are  productive  of  freedom,  and  praised  by  the  wise; 
which  are  untarnished  by  the  desire  of  future  life,  or  by  the  belief  in  the 
efficacy  of  outward  acts;  and  which  are  conducive  to  high  and  holy 
thoughts — so  long  as  the  brethren  shall  live  among  the  saints,  cherishing, 
botli  in  public  and  in  private,  that  noble  and  saving  faith  wliich  leads  to 
the  complete  destruction  of  the  sorrow  of  him  who  acts  according  to  it — so 
long  may  the  brethren  be  expected  not  to  decline,  but  to  prosper. 

"So  long  as  these  six  conditions  shall  continue  to  exist  among  the 
brethren,  so  long  as  they  are  instructed  in  these  six  conditions,  so  long 
may  the  brethren  be  expected  not  to  decline,  but  to  jirosper." 

And  while  the  Blessed  One  stayed  there  at  Ragagaha  on  the  Vulture's 
Peak  he  held  that  comprehensive  religious  talk  with  tlie  brethren  on  the 
nature  of  upright  conduct,  and  of  earnest  contemplation,  and  of  intelli- 
gence. "Great  is  the  fruit,  great  the  advantage  of  earnest  contemplation 
when  set  round  with  upright  conduct.  Great  is  the  fruit,  great  the  advan- 
tage of  intellect  wlien  set  round  with  earnest  contemplation.  Tlie  mind 
set  round  with  intelligence  is  freed  from  the  great  evils,  that  is  to  say,  from 
sensuality,  from  individuality,  from  delusion,  and  from  ignorance."* 

'  Biuklhist  Suttas,  translated  from  Pali,  by  T.  W.  Rhys  Davids,  pp.  6-11,  vol.  xi,  of 
Sacred  Books  of  the  Eiist.     Oxford,  1881. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  45 

The  following  is  the  twentieth  chapter  of  the  Dhammapada,  an- 
other subdivision  of  the  Sutra-Pitaka : 

The  best  of  ways  is  the  eightfold  ;  the  best  of  truths  the  four  words ;  tho 
best  of  virtues  passionlessness ;  the  best  of  men  he  who  has  eyes  to  see. 

This  is  the  way.  there  is  no  other  that  leads  to  the  purifying  of  intelli- 
gence.   Go  on  this  way  I    Everything  else  is  the  deceit  of  Mara  (the  tempter). 

If  you  go  on  this  way,  you  will  make  an  end  of  pain!  The  way  was 
preached  by  me,  when  I  had  understood  the  removal  of  the  thorns  (in  the 
flesh). 

You  yourself  must  make  an  effort.  The  Tathagatas  (Buddhas)  are  only 
preachers.  The  thoughtful  who  enter  the  way  are  freed  from  the  bondage 
of  Mara. 

"All  created  things  perish,"  he  who  knows  and  sees  this  becomes  passive 
in  pain ;  this  is  the  way  to  purity. 

"All  created  things  are  grief  and  pain,"  he  who  knows  and  sees  this  be- 
comes passive  in  pain ;  this  is  the  way  that  leads  to  purity. 

"All  forms  are  unreal,"  he  who  knows  and  sees  this  becomes  passive  in 
pain;  this  is  the  way  that  leads  to  purity. 

He  who  does  not  rouse  himself  when  it  is  time  to  rise,  who,  though 
young  and  strong,  is  full  of  sloth,  whose  will  and  thought  are  weak,  that 
lazy  and  idle  man  will  never  find  the  way  to  knowledge. 

Watching  his  speech,  well  restrained  in  mind,  let  a  man  never  commit 
any  wrong  with  his  body!  Let  a  man  keep  these  three  roads  of  action 
clear,  and  he  will  achieve  the  way  which  is  taught  by  the  wise. 

Through  zeal  knowledge  is  gotten,  through  lack  of  zeal  knowledge  is 
lost;  let  a  man  who  knows  this  double  path  of  gain  and  loss  thus  place 
himself  that  knowledge  may  grow. 

Cut  down  the  whole  forest  (of  lust),  not  a  tree  only!  Danger  comes  out 
of  the  forest  (of  lust).  When  you  have  cut  down  both  the  forest  (of  lust) 
and  its  undergrowth,  then,  Bhikshus,  you  will  be  rid  of  the  forest  and  free! 

So  long  as  the  love  of  man  toward  women,  even  the  smallest,  is  not  de- 
stroyed, so  long  is  his  mind  in  bondage,  as  the  calf  that  drinks  milk  is  to 
its  mother. 

Cut  out  the  love  of  self,  like  an  autumn  lotus,  with  thy  hand !  Cherish 
the  road  of  peace.     Nirvana  has  been  shown  by  Sugata  (Buddha). 

"Here  I  shall  dwell  in  the  rain,  here  in  winter  and  summer,"  thus  the 
fool  meditates,  and  does  not  think  of  his  death. 

Death  comes  and  carries  off  that  man,  praised  for  his  children  and  flocks, 
his  mind  distracted,  as  a  flood  carries  off'  a  sleeping  village. 

Sons  are  no  help,  nor  a  father,  nor  relations;  there  is  no  help  from  kins- 
folk for  one  whom  death  has  seized. 

A  wise  and  good  man  who  knows  the  meaning  of  this,  should  quickly 
clear  the  way  that  leads  to  Nirvana.* 

'  The  Dhammapada,  translated  by  F.  Max  Miiller,  pp.  67-69,  vol.  x,  of  Sacred  Books 
of  the  East.  Oxford,  1881.  Published  also  along  with  Rogers'  translation  of  Buddha- 
ghosha's  Parables  (Lond.,  1870),  and  Miiller'a  Lectures  on  the  Science  of  Religion. 
New  York,  1872. 


46  INTRODUCTION  TO 


Chinese  Sacred  Books. 

Three  diverse  religious  systems  prevail  in  China — Buddhism, 
Three reii^ons  Taoism,  and  Confucianism,  each  of  which  has  a  vast 
of  cbina.  multitude  of  adherents.     The  sacred  books  of  the  first 

named  consist  of  translations  of  the  Buddhist  canon  from  various 
languages  of  India,  principally,  however,  from  the  Sanskrit,  and 
need  no  separate  notice  here.'  The  great  book  of  Taoism  is  the 
Tao-teh-King,  a  production  of  the  celebrated  philosopher  Laotsze, 
who  was  born  about  six  hundred  years  before  the  Christian  era. 
The  sacred  books  of  Confucianism  are  commonly  known  as  the  five 
King  and  the  four  Shu. 

The  Tao-teh-King  is  scarcely  entitled  to  the  name  of  a  sacred 
The  Tao-teh-  book.  It  is  rather  a  philosophical  treatise,  by  an  acute 
King.  speculative  mind,  and  resembles  some  of  the  subtle  por- 

tions of  Plato's  dialogues.  It  is  about  the  length  of  the  book  of 
Ecclesiastes,  to  which  it  also  bears  some  resemblance.  But  it  is  de- 
nied, on  high  authority,  that  there  is  any  real  connexion  between 
Taoism  as  a  religion  now  prevalent  in  China  and  this  book  of 
Laotsze.''  The  Tao-teh-King  has  been  divided  into  eighty-one 
short  chapters,  and  is  devoted  to  the  inculcation  and  praise  of  Avhat 
the  author  calls  his  Tao.  What  all  this  word  is  designed  to  rep- 
resent is  very  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  determine.  In  the  In- 
troduction to  his  translation  of  the  work,  Chalmers  says :  "  I  have 
thought  it  better  to  leave  the  word  Tao  untranslated,  both  because 
The  meaning  it  lias  given  the  name  to  the  sect  (the  Taoists),  and  be- 
of  Tao.  cause  no  English  word  is  its  exact  equivalent.     Three 

terms  suggest  themselves — the  Waj^,  Reason,  and  the  Word ;  but 
they  are  all  liable  to  objection.  Were  we  guided  by  etymology, 
'the  Way,'  would  come  nearest  to  the  original,  and  in  one  or  two 
passages  the  idea  of  a  loay  seems  to  be  in  the  term;  but  this  is  too 
materialistic  to  serve  the  purpose  of  a  translation.  '  Reason,'  again, 
seems  to  be  more  like  a  quality  or  attribute  of  some  conscious  being 
than  Tao  is.  I  would  translate  it  by  'the  Word,'  in  the  sense  of 
the  Logos,  but  this  would  be  like  settling  the  question  which  I  wish 
to  leave  open,  viz.,  what  amount  of  resemblance  there  is  between 
the  Logos  of  the  New  Testament  and  this  Tao,  Avhich  is  its  nearest 
representative  in  Chinese.     In  our  version  of  the  New  Testament 

'  Tlie  extent  of  this  literatiire  may  be  seen*in  Beal's  Catena  of  Buddhist  Scriptures 
from  the  Chinese.     Lond.,  1871. 

'  See  Legge,  Lectures  on  the  Religions  of  China.  Lecture  3d,  on  Taoism  as  a  Re- 
ligion and  a  Philosophy.     New  York,  1881. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  47 

in  Chinese  vre  have  in  the  first  chapter  of  John,  '  In  the  beginning 
was  Tao,^  etc."  * 

Others  have  sought  by  other  terms  to  express  the  idea  of  Tao. 
It  has  been  called  the  Supreme  Reason,  the  Universal  Soul,  tlie 
Eternal  Idea,  the  Nameless  Void,  Mother  of  being,  and  Laotsze's  ac- 
Essence  of  things.  The  following  is  from  Laotsze  him-  count  of  xao. 
self,  and  one  of  the  best  specimens  of  his  book,  being  the  whole  of 
chapter  twenty-fifth,  as  translated  by  Chalmers : 

There  was  something  chaotic  in  nature  which  existed  before  heaven  and 
eartli.  It  was  still.  It  was  void.  It  stood  alone  and  was  not  changed. 
It  pervaded  everywhere  and  was  not  endangered.  It  may  be  regarded  as 
the  mother  of  the  universe.  I  know  not  its  name,  but  give  it  the  title  of 
Tao.  If  I  am  forced  to  make  a  name  for  it,  I  say  it  is  Great;  being  great, 
I  say  that  it  passes  away;  passing  away,  I  say  that  it  is  far  ofi;  being  far 
off,  I  say  that  it  returns.  Now  Tao  is  great;  heaven  is  great;  earth  is 
great;  a  king  is  great.  In  the  universe  there  are  four  greatnesses,  and  a 
king  is  one  of  them.  Man  talces  his  law  from  the  earth;  the  earth  takes  its 
law  from  heaven ;  heaven  takes  its  law  from  Tao ;  and  Tao  takes  its  law  from 
what  it  is  in  itself. 

The  moral  teachings  of  the  book  may  be  seen  in  chapters  sixty- 
third  and  sixty-seventh,  which  are  thus  translated  by  Legge : 

(It  is  the  way  of  Tao)  not  to  act  from  any  personal  motive;  to  conduct 
affairs  witliout  feeling  the  trouble  of  them;  to  taste  wdthout  being  aware 
of  tlie  flavour:  to  account  the  great  as  small  and  the  small  as  great;  to 
recompense  injury  with  kindness. 

(The  follower  of  Tao)  anticipates  things  that  would  1)ecome  difficult 
while  they  are  easy,  and  does  things  that  would  become  great  while  they 
are  little.  The  difficult  things  in  the  world  arise  from  what  are  easy,  and 
the  great  things  from  what  are  small.  Thus  it  is  that  the  sage  never  does 
what  is  great,  and  therefore  can  accomplish  the  greatest  thingSL 

He  who  assents  lightly  will  be  found  to  keej)  but  little  faith.  He  who 
takes  many  things  easily  is  sure  to  meet  with  many  difficulties.  Hence  the 
sage  sees  difficulty  in  (what  seem)  easy  things,  and  therefore  never  has  any 
difficulties. 

All  in  the  world  say  that  my  Tao  is  great,  but  that  I  seem  to  be  inferior 
to  others.  Now  it  is  just  this  greatness  which  makes  me  seem  inferior  to 
others.     Those  who  are  deemed  equal  to  others  have  long  been — small  men. 

But  there  are  three  precious  things  which  I  prize  and  hold  fast.  The 
first  is  gentle  compassion;  the  second  is  economy;  the  third  is  (humility), 
not  presuming  to  take  precedence  in  the  world.  With  gentle  compassion 
I  can  be  brave.     With  economy  I  can  be  liberal.     Not  presuming  to  claim 

'  The  Speculations  on  Metaphysics,  Polity,  and  Morality,  of  "  the  Old  Philosopher," 
Laotsze ;  translated  from  the  Chinese,  with  an  Introduction  by  John  Chalmers,  A.M., 
pp.  xi,  xii.     Lond.,  1868. 


43  INTRODUCTION  TO 

precedence  in  the  workl,  I  can  make  myself  a  vessel  fit  for  the  most  distin- 
guished services.  Now-a-days  they  give  up  gentle  compassion,  and  culti- 
vate (mere  physical)  courage ;  they  give  up  economy,  and  (try  to  be)  lavish 
(without  it);  they  give  up  being  last,  and  seek  to  be  first: — of  all  wliich 
tlie  end  is  deatli.  Gentle  compassion  is  sure  to  overcome  in  fight,  and  to 
be  firm  in  maintaining  its  own.  Heaven  will  save  its  possessor,  protecting 
bim  by  his  gentleness.* 

It  has  been  disputed  whether  the  Tao-teh-King  acknowledges 
Leaves  the  per-  the  existence  of  a  personal  God.  Professor  Douglas 
of^GoTdoubt!  tleclares  that  Laotsze  knew  nothing  of  such  a  being, 
fui.  and  that  the  whole  tenor  of  his  philosophy  antagonizes 

such  a  belief.  Legge,  on  the  other  hand,  affirms  that  the  Tao-teh- 
King  does  recognize  the  existence  of  God,  but  contains  no  direct 
religious  teaching.  Laotsze's  Taoism,  he  observes,  is  the  exhibition 
of  a  way  or  method  of  living  which  men  should  cultivate  as  the 
highest  and  purest  development  of  their  nature.  It  has  served  as 
a  discipline  of  mind  and  life  for  multitudes,  leading  some  to  with- 
draw entirely  from  the  busy  world,  and  others  to  struggle  earnestly 
to  keep  themselves  from  the  follies  and  passions  of  reckless  and 
ambitio;is  men.  The  highest  moral  teaching  of  Laotsze  is  found  in 
the  chapter  sixty-third,  quoted  above,  in  which  he  says  that  Tao 
prompts  "  to  recompense  injury  with  kindness."  In  this  particular 
he  surpassed  Confucius,  whose  great  glory  it  was  to  enunciate,  in 
negative  form,  the  golden  rule,  "  What  you  do  not  want  done  to 
yourself,  do  not  do  to  others."  Confucius  confessed  that  he  did 
not  always  keep  his  own  rule,  much  less  could  he  adopt  the  loftier 
precept  of  Laotsze,  but  said  rather,  "Recompense  injury  with  jus- 
tice, and  return  good  for  good."  * 

Far  more  extensive  and  important,  however,  taken  as  a  whole, 
Confucius  and  are  the  sacred  books  of  Confucianism,  which  is  par  ex- 
cifineseTcrip"-  ^^^^^^^^  ^^^  religion  of  the  Chinese  Empire.  But  Con- 
ures.  fucius  was  not  the  founder  of  the  religion  which  has 

become  attached  to  his  name.  He  claimed  merely  to  have  studied 
deeply  into  antiquity,  and  to  be  a  transmitter  and  teacher  of  the 
records  and  worship  of  the  past.  "  It  is  an  error,"  says  Legge, 
"  to  suppose  that  he  compiled  the  historical  documents,  poems,  and 
other  ancient  books  from  various  works  existing  in  his  time.  Por- 
tions of  the  oldest  works  had  already  perished.  His  study  of  those 
that  remained,  and  his  exhortations  to  his  disciples  also  to  study 
them,  contributed  to  their  preservation.  What  he  wrote  or  said 
about  their  meaning  should  be  received  by  us  with  reverence ;  but 

'  Lectures  on  the  Relig-lons  of  China,  ]ip.  222-224. 
'  Comp.  Legge,  Ibid.,  pp.  143  and  passim. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  49 

if  all  the  works  which  he  handled  had  come  down  to  us  entire,  we 
should  have  been,  so  far  as  it  is  possible  for  foreigners  to  be,  in  the 
same  position  as  he  was  for  learning  the  ancient  religion  of  his 
country.  Our  text-books  would  be  the  same  as  his.  Unfortunate- 
ly most  of  the  ancient  books  suffered  loss  and  injury  after  Confu- 
cius had  passed  from  the  stage  of  life.  We  have  reason,  however 
to  be  thankful  that  we  possess  so  many  and  so  much  of  them.  No 
other  literature,  comparable  to  them  for  antiquity,  has  come  down 
to  us  in  such  a  state  of  preservation." ' 

The  five  King  are  known  respectively  as  the  Shu,  the  Shih,  the 
Yi,  the  Li  Ki,  and  the  Khun  Khiu.^  The  name  King,  Names  of  the 
which  means  a  web  of  cloth,  or  the  warp  which  keeps  ^^'^  King. 
the  threads  in  place,  came  into  use  in  the  time  of  the  Han  dynasty, 
about  B.  C.  200,  and  was  applied  by  the  scholars  of  this  period  to 
the  most  valuable  ancient  books,  which  were  regarded  as  having  a 
sort  of  canonical  authority. 

The  Shu  King  is  a  book  of  historical  documents,  somewhat  re- 
sembling the  various  historical  portions  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  is  believed  to  be  the  oldest  of  all  the  '^^^  ^^"  ^'''^^ 
Chinese  books.  Its  contents  relate  to  a  period  extending  over  sev- 
enteen centuries,  from  about  B.  C.  2357  to  B.  C.  G27.  It  commences 
with  an  account  of  Yao,  the  most  venerable  of  the  ancient  kings,  of 
whom  it  is  written :  "  He  was  reverential,  intelligent,  accomplished, 
and  thoughtful, — naturally  and  without  effort.  He  was  sincerely 
coxarteous,  and  capable  of  all  complaisance.  The  bright  influence 
of  these  qualities  was  felt  through  the  four  quarters  of  the  land, 
and  reached  to  heaven  above  and  earth  beneath.  He  made  the 
able  and  virtuous  distinguished,  and  thence  proceeded  to  the  love 
of  all  in  the  nine  classes  of  his  kindred,  who  thus  became  harmoni- 
ous. He  also  regulated  and  polished  the  people  of  his  domain,  who 
all  became  brightly  intelligent.  Finally,  he  united  and  harmonized 
the  myriad  states;  and  so  the  black-haired  people  were  transformed. 
Tl*e  result  was  universal  concord." 

The  Shu  King  is  about  equal  in  extent  to  the  two  books  of 
Chronicles,  and  is  divided  into  five  parts,  which  are  designated  re- 
spectively, the  books  of  Thang,  Yu.  Hsia,  Shang,  and  Kau.  These 
are  the  names  of  so  many  different  ancient  dynasties  which  ruled  in 
China,  and  the  several  books  consist  of  the  annals,  speeches,  counsels, 
and  proclamations  of  the  great  kings  and  ministers  of  the  ancients. 

'  Preface  to  his  translation  of  the  Shu  King  in  vol.  iii  of  the  Sacred  Books  of  the 
East,  as  edited  by  Max  Miiller. 

"^  We  here  adopt  the  orthography  followed  by  Legge  in  his  translations  for  the  Sa- 
cred Books  of  the  East. 
4 


50  INTRODUCTION   TO 

The  following  passage  is  one  of  the  most  favourable  specimens,  and 
illustrates  the  tone  and  character  of  Chinese  morality,  and  their 
most  popular  conceptions  of  virtue.  It  is  from  the  third  book 
of  Part  II,  which  is  entitled  "  The  Counsels  of  Kao-yao."  Kao- 
yao  was  the  minister  of  crime  iinder  the  reign  of  the  great  Emperor 
Shun  (about  2300  B.  C),  and  is  celebrated  as  a  model  administrator 
of  justice  • 

Kao-yao  said,  "O!  there  are  in  all  nine  virtues  to  be  discovered  in  con- 
duct, and  when  we  say  that  a  man  possesses  (any)  virtue,  that  is  as  much 
as  to  say  he  does  such  and  such  things."  Yu  asked,  "What  (are  the  nine 
virtues)?"  Kao-yao  replied,  "Affability  combined  with  dignity ;  mildness 
combined  with  firmness;  bluntness  combined  with  respectfulness;  aptness 
for  government  combined  with  reverent  caution ;  docility  combined  with 
boldness;  straightforwardness  combined  with  gentleness;  an  easy  negli- 
gence combined  with  discrimination;  boldness  combined  with  sincerity; 
and  valour  comlMned  with  righteousness.  (Wlien  these  qualities  are)  dis- 
played, and  that  continuously,  have  we  not  the  good  (officer)?  When  there 
is  a  daily  display  of  three  (of  these)  virtues,  their  possessor  could  early  and 
late  regulate  and  brighten  the  clan  (of  which  he  was  made  chief).  When 
there  is  a  daily  severe  and  reverent  cultivation  of  six  of  them,  their  pos- 
sessor could  brilliantly  conduct  the  affairs  of  the  state  (with  which  he  was 
invested).  Wlien  (such  men)  are  all  received  and  advanced,  the  possessors 
of  those  nine  virtues  will  be  employed  in  (the  public)  service.  The  men 
of  a  thousand  and  men  of  a  hundred  will  be  in  their  offices ;  the  various 
ministers  will  emulate  one  another;  all  the  officers  will  accomplish  their 
duties  at  the  proper  times,  observant  of  the  five  seasons  (as  the  several 
elements  predominate  in  them), — and  thus  their  various  duties  will  be  fully 
accomplished.  Let  not  (the  Son  of  Heaven)  set  to  the  holders  of  states  the 
example  of  indolence  or  dissoluteness.  Let  him  be  wnry  and  fearful  (re- 
membering that)  in  one  day  or  two  days  there  may  occur  ten  thousand 
springs  of  things.  Let  him  not  have  his  various  officers  cumberers  of  their 
places.     The  work  is  Heaven's ;  men  must  act  for  it !  " 

A  passage  in  Part  V,  Book  4,  thus  enumerates  the  five  sources 
of  haj)piness,  and  the  six  extreme  evils :  • 

The  first  is  long  life;  the  second,  riches;  the  third,  soundness  of  body 
and  serenity  of  mind  ;  the  fourth,  the  love  of  virtue;  and  the  fifth,  fulfilling 
to  the  end  the  will  of  Heaven.  Of  the  six  extreme  evils,  the  first  is  mis- 
fortune sliortening  life;  tlie  second,  sickness;  tlie  third,  distress  of  mind; 
the  fourth,  poverty;  the  fifth,  wickedness;  the  sixth,  weakness. 

The  Shih  King  is  a  book  of  poetry,  and  contains  three  hundred 
and  five  pieces,  commonly  called  odes.     It  is  the  ]>salter 

TheShlhKlng.       „.       ^l.  ,  .,  ,  ,  •   .       r  i     n     i         w'         +^ 

of  the  Chmese  bible,  and  consists  ot  ballads  relating  to 
customs  and  events  of  Chinese  antiquity,  and  songs  and  hymns  to 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  51 

be  sung  on  great  state  occasions  and  in  connexion  with  sacrificial 
services.'  The  following  is  a  fair  examj^le  of  the  odes  used  in  con- 
nexion with  the  worship  of  ancestors.  A  young  king,  feeling  his 
responsibilities,  would  fain  follow  the  example  of  his  father,  and 
prays  to  him  for  help  : 

I  take  counsel,  at  tlie  beginning  of  my  rule, 
How  I  can  follow  the  example  of  my  shrined  father. 
All !  far-reaching  were  his  plans, 
And  I  am  not  yet  able  to  carry  them  out. 
However,  I  endeavour  to  reach  to  them, 
My  continuation  of  them  will  still  be  all-deflected. 
I  am  a  little  cliild. 

Unequal  to  the  many  difficulties  of  the  state. 
Having  taken  bis  place,  I  will  look  for  him  to  go  up 

and  come  down  in  the  court. 
To  ascend  and  descend  in  the  house. 
Admirable  ait  thou,  O  great  Father; 
Condescend  to  preserve  and  enlighten  me." 

The  Yi  King  is  commonly  called  "the  Book  of  Changes,"  from 
its  supposed  illustrations  of  the  onward  course  of  nature 

TIT  •  n     ^  iTTT  •         The   Yi  King. 

and  the  changing  customs  of  the  world.  It  contams 
eight  trigrams,  ascribed  to  Fuhsi,  the  mythical  founder  of  the 
Chinese  nation,  and  hence  some  have  believed  it  to  be  the  oldest  of 
all  the  Chinese  scriptures.  But  according  to  Legge,  "  not  a  single 
character  in  the  Yi  is  older  than  the  twelfth  century  B.  C.  The 
text  of  it,  not  taking  in  the  appendices  of  Confucius,  consists  of 
two  portions — from  king  Wan,  and  from  his  son,  the  duke  of 
Chan.  The  composition  of  Wan's  portion  is  referred  to  the  year 
B.  C.  1143.  As  an  authority  for  the  ancient  religion  of  China, 
therefore,  the  Yi  is  by  no  means  equal  to  the  Shu  and  the  Shih. 
It  is  based  on  diagrams,  or  lineal  figures,  ascribed  to  Fuhsi,  and 

made  up  of  whole  and  divided  lines  ( and ).    What  their 

framer  intended  by  these  figures  we  do  not  know.  No  doubt  there 
was  a  tradition  about  it,  and  I  am  willing  to  believe  that  it  found 
a  home  in  the  existing  Yi.  .  .  .  The  character  called  Yi  is  the 
Bvmbol  for  the  idea  of  chansje.  The  fashion  of  the  world  is  con- 
tinually  being  altered.  We  have  action  and  re-action,  flux  and 
reflux — now  one   condition,   and   immediately   its    opposite.     The 

'  See  The  Shih  King ;  or  the  Book  of  Ancient  Poetry,  translated  into  English  Verse, 
with  Essays  and  Notes,  by  James  Legge.     Lend.,  IS'TG. 

2  Decade  III,  Ode  2,  p.  829,  Sacred  Books  of  the  East,  vol.  iii.     Oxford,  1879. 

^  The  Yi  King  is  translated  and  annotated  by  Legge  in  vol.  xvi  of  the  Sacred  Books 
of  the  East.     Oxford,  1882. 


53  INTRODUCTION   TO 

vicissitudes  in  the  worlds  of  sense  and  society  have  their  correspon- 
.dencies  in  the  changes  that  take  place  in  the  lines  of  the  diagrams. 
Again,  certain  relations  and  conditions  of  men  and  things  lead  to 
good,  are  fortunate;  and  certain  others  lead  to  evil,  are  unfortunate; 
and  these  results  are  indicated  by  the  relative  position  of  the  lines* 
Those  lines  were  systematically  changed  by  manipulating  with  a 
fixed  number  of  the  stalks  of  a  certain  plant.  In  this  way  the  Yi 
served  the  purpose  of  divination;  and  since  such  is  the  nature  of 
the  book,  a  reader  must  be  prepared  for  much  in  it  that  is  tantaliz- 
ing, fantastic,  and  perplexing.'" 

The  two  remaining  classics  are  of  less  interest  and  imjiortance. 
The  Li  Ki  and  The  Li  Ki  King  is  a  record  of  rites,  consisting  of  three 
theKhunKWu.  collections,  called  "the  Three  Rituals,"  and  is  the  most 
bulky  of  the  Five  King.  It  contains  regulations  for  the  administra- 
tion of  the  government,  describes  the  various  officers  and  their 
duties,  and  the  rules  of  etiquette  by  which  scholars  and  officers 
should  order  their  conduct  on  social  and  state  occasions.  The 
Khun  Khiu  King  is  of  the  nature  of  a  supplement  to  the  historical 
annals  of  the  Shu  King.  It  was  compiled  by  Confucius  from  the 
annals  of  his  native  state  of  Lu,  and  extends  from  the  year  B.  C.  722 
to  B.  C.  481. 

The  Chinese  classics  known  as  "the  Four  Shu"  have  not  the 
rank  and  autliority  of  the  Five  King.  They  are  the  works  of  dis- 
ciples of  Confucius,  and  consist  (1)  of  the  Lun  Yu,  or  Discourses 
of  Confucius  and  conversations  between  him  and  his  followers ; 
(2)  the  works  of  Mencius,  next  to  Confucius  the  greatest  sage  and 
teacher  of  Confucianism;  (3)  the  Ta  Ilsio,  or  Great  Learning, 
ascribed  to  Tszang-tsze,  a  disciple  of  Confucius ;  and  (4)  the  Kung 
Yung,  or  Doctrine  of  the  Mean,  a  production  of  Tszesze,  the  grand- 
son of  Confucius.'^  There  is  also  the  Hsiao  King,  or  Classic  of 
Filial  Piety,  ^vhich  holds  a  high  place  in  Chinese  literature.' 

In  the  preface  to  his  translation  of  the  Sacred  Books  of  China, 
Legge  observes,  "that  the  ancient  books  of  China  do  not  profess  to 
have  been  inspired,  or  to  contain  what  we  should  call  a  Revelation. 
Historians,  poets,  and  others  wrote  them  as  they  were  moved  in 
their  own  minds.  An  old  poem  may  occasionally  contain  what  it 
says  was  spoken  by  God,  but  we  can  only  understand  that  language 
as  calling  attention  emphatically  to  the  statement  to  which  it  is 

1  The  Religions  of  China,  pp.  37,  38. 

'  See  The  Chinese  Classics,  with  a  Translation,  Critical  and  Exegetical  Notes,  Pro- 
legomena, and  copious  Indexes.     Hong  Kong,  1861-1865. 

'  The  Hsiao  King  is  translated  and  annotated  by  Legge  in  vol.  iii  of  Sacred  Books 
of  the  East. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  53 

prefixed.  "We  also  read  of  Heaven's  raising  up  the  great  ancient 
sovereigns  and  teachers,  and  variously  assisting  them  to  accomplish 
their  undertakings;  but  all  this  need  not  be  more  than  what  a  relig- 
ious man  of  any  country  might  affirm  at  the  present  day  of  direc- 
tion, help,  and  guidance  given  to  himself  and  others  from  above." 

Whatever  the  true  solution  of  the  questions  may  be,  the  facts 
that  distinguished  Chinese  scholars  dispute  as  to  whether  the  Con- 
fucian Sacred  Books  recognize  the  existence  of  a  personal  God,  and 
that  missionaries,  in  translating  the  Christian  Scriptures  into  Chi- 
nese, scruple  over  a  word  that  will  properly  represent  the  Christian 
idea  of  God,  show  the  comparative  vagueness  and  obscurity  of  the 
religion  of  the  Chinese  scriptures. 

The  Egyptian  Book  of  the  Dead. 

A  most  mysterious  and  interesting  work  is  the  Sacred  Book  of 
the  ancient  Egyptians,  commonly  known  as  the  Book  of  the  Dead. 
Some  Egyptologists  prefer  the  title  "Funeral  Ritual,"  inasmuch 
as  it  contains  many  prescriptions  and  prayers  to  be  used  j^s  different 
in  funeral  services,  and  the  vignettes  which  appear  on  names. 
many  copies  represent  funeral  processions,  and  priests  reading  the 
formularies  out  of  a  book.  But  as  the  prayers  are,  for  the  most 
part,  the  language  to  be  used  by  the  departed  in  their  progress 
through  the  under  world,  the  title  "  Book  of  the  Dead "  has  been 
generally  adopted. 

The  Egyptian  title  of  the  work  is,  Book  of  the  Peri  em  km,  three 
simple  words,  but  by  no  means  easy  of  explanation  when  taken  to- 
gether without  a  context.^  Peri  signifies  "  coming  forth,"  hrii  is 
"  day,"  and  em  is  the  preposition  signifying  "  from,"  susceptible, 
like  the  same  preposition  in  other  languages,  of  a  variety  of  uses. 
The  probable  meaning  of  Peri  em  hru  is  "  coming  forth  by  day," 
and  is  to  be  understood  mainly  of  the  immortality  and  resurrection 
of  the  dead.  The  book  exists  in  a  great  number  of  manuscripts 
recovered  from  Egy^^tian  tombs,  and  the  text  is  very  corrupt;  for 
as  the  writing  was  not  intended  for  mortal  eyes,  but  to  be  buried 
with  the  dead,  copyists  Avould  not  be  likely  to  be  very  scrupulous  in 
their  work.  But  the  book  exists  not  only  on  papyrus  rolls  that 
were  deposited  in  the  tombs,  but  many  of  the  chaj^ters  are  inscribed 
upon  coftins,  mummies,  sepulchral  wrappings,  statues,  and  the  walls 
of  tombs.     Some  tombs  may  be  said  to  contain  entire  recensions  of 

'  The  Religion  of  Ancient  Egypt,  by  P.  Le  Page  Renouf.  Hibbert  Lectures  for 
1879,  p.  181.  New  York,  1880.  Our  account  of  the  Book  of  the  Dead  is  condensed 
mainly  from  Renouf's  fifth  Lecture. 


54  INTRODUCTION   TO 

the  book.  But  no  two  copies  contain  exactly  the  same  chapters,  or 
Corrupt  and  follow  the  same  arrangement.  The  pa2:)yrus  of  Turin, 
diUrm '^of  *^the  P^l^lished  by  Lepsius,  contains  one  hundred  and  sixty- 
text,  five  chapters,  and  is  the  longest  known.  But  a  consider- 
able number  of  chapters  found  in  other  manuscripts  are  not  included 
in  it.  None  of  the  copies  contain  the  entire  collection  of  chapters, 
but  the  more  ancient  manuscripts  have  fewer  chapters  than  the 
more  recent.  There  is  a  great  uniformity  of  style  and  of  grammat- 
ical forms,  as  compared  with  other  productions  of  Egyptian  litera- 
ture, and  nothing  can  exceed  the  simplicity  and  brevity  of  the 
sentences.  A  critical  collation  of  a  sufficient  number  of  copies  of 
each  chapter  will,  in  time,  restore  the  text  to  as  accurate  a  standard 
as  could  be  attained  in  the  most  flourishing  days  of  the  old  Egyp- 
tian monarchy. 

The  book  is  mythological  throughout/  and  assumes  the  reader's 
Its  obscurity  fs-^^ilia-i'lty  with  its  myths  and  legends.  The  difficulty 
In  the  subject  of  its  exposition  is  not  in  literally  translating  the  text, 
but  in  understanding  the  meaning  concealed  beneath 
familiar  words.  The  English  translation  by  Samuel  Birch,  pub- 
lished in  the  fifth  volume  of  Bunsen's  Egypt's  Place  in  Universal 
History,  is  an  exact  rendering  of  the  text  of  the  Turin  manuscript, 
and  to  an  Englishman  gives  nearly  as  correct  an  impression  of  the 
original  as  the  text  itself  would  do  to  an  Egyptian  who  had  not 
been  carefully  taught  the  mysteries  of  his  religion. 

The  foundation  of  Egyptian  mythology  is  the  legend  of  Osiris.' 
The  Osiris  le-  Having  long  ruled  in  Egypt,  he  was  at  last  slain  by  the 
oT  Egyptian  ®^'^^  Typhon,  enclosed  in  a  mummy  case,  and  cast  into 
mr^hoiogy.  the  river  Nile.  Isis,  his  sister  and  spouse,  sought  long 
for  his  body,  and  at  length  found  it  at  Byblus,  on  the  Phoenician 
coast,  where  it  had  been  tossed  by  the  waves.  She  brought  it  back 
to  Egypt,  and  buried  it;  and  when  Horus,  their  son,  grew  up,  he 
slew  the  evil  Typhon,  and  so  avenged  his  father.  Osiris,  however, 
was  not  dead.  He  had,  in  fact,  descended  to  the  under  world,  and 
established  his  dominion  there,  and  at  the  same  time  revived  in  the 
person  of  his  son  Horus,  and  renewed  his  dominion  over  the  living, 

'"The  Ritual,"  says  Biroh,  "is,  according  to  Egyptian  notions,  essentially  an  in- 
spired work ;  and  the  term  Uermetie,  so  often  applied  by  profane  writers  to  these 
books,  in  reality  means  inspired.  It  is  Thoth  himself  who  speaks  and  reveals  the 
will  of  the  gods  and  the  mysterious  nature  of  divine  things  to  man.  .  .  .  Portions  of 
them  are  expressly  stated  to  liave  been  written  by  the  very  finger  of  Thoth  himself, 
and  to  have  been  the  composition  of  a  great  God."  Introduction  to  his  translation  of 
the  Funeral  Ritual,  in  Bunsen's  Egypt's  Place  in  Universal  History,  vol.  v,  p.  133. 

'  On  this  Egyptian  legend  comp.  Bunsen,  Egypt's  Place  in  Universal  History,  vol.  i^ 
pp.  423-439,  and  George  Rawlinson,  History  of  Ancient  Egypt,  vol.  i,  pp.  366-371. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  55 

The  usual  <;xplanation  of  this  legend  makes  it  a  mythical  por- 
traiture of  the  annual  dying  and  reviving  of  the  powers  ^^ 
of  nature  under  the  peculiar  conditions  of  the  valley  of  meaning  of  the 
the  Nile.  Osiris  represents  the  fertilizing  river ;  Isis  ™^''  ' 
the  fruit-bearing  land;  Typhon  the  evil  spirit  of  the  parched  des- 
erts and  the  salt  sea,  the  demon  of  drought  and  barrenness.  Horus 
is  the  sun,  appearing  in  the  vernal  equinox,  and  heralding  the  rising 
of  the  Nile.  Accordingly,  when  the  Nile  sinks  before  the  scorch- 
ing winds  of  the  Libyan  desert,  Osiris  is  slain  by  Typhon.  Isis, 
th3  land,  then  sighs  and  yearns  for  her  lost  brother  and  spouse. 
But  when  the  Nile  again  overflows,  it  is  a  resurrection  of  Osiris, 
and  the  vernal  sun  destroys  the  demon  of  drought  and  renews  the 
face  of  nature.  Other  slightly  varying  explanations  of  the  legend 
have  been  given,  but  whatever  particular  view  we  adopt,  it  will  be 
easy  to  see  how  the  drapery  of  these  legends  might,  in  course  of 
time,  come  to  be  used  of  the  death  and  resurrection  of  man.  Hence 
we  find  that  the  names  of  mythical  personages  are  constantly  re- 
curring in  the  Book  of  the  Dead. 

The  beatification  of  the  dead  is  the  main  subject  of  the  book. 
The  blessed  dead  are  represented  as  enjoying  an  exis-  ^  ^ 
tence  similar  to  that  which  they  had  led  on  earth.  They  the  dead  the 
have  the  use  of  all  their  limbs,  eat  and  drink,  and  satisfy  ^^^^  eu^jec . 
all  their  physical  wants  as  in  their  earthly  life.  But  they  are  not 
confined  to  any  one  locality,  or  to  any  one  form  or  mode  of  exis- 
tence. They  have  the  range  of  the  entire  universe,  in  every  shape 
and  form  which  they  desire.  Twelve  chapters  of  the  Book  of  the 
Dead  consist  of  formulas  to  be  used  in  effecting  certain  transforma- 
tions. The  forms  assumed,  according  to  these  chapters,  are  the 
tui-tledove,  the  serpent  Sata,  the  bird  Bennu,  the  crocodile  Sebek, 
the  god  Ptah,  a  golden  hawk,  the  chief  of  the  principal  gods,  a 
soul,  a  lotusflower,  and  a  heron.  The  transformations  to  which 
these  chapters  refer,  however,  are  far  from  exhausting  the  list  of 
possible  ones.  No  limit  is  imposed  on  the  will  of  the  departed,  and 
in  this  respect  the  Egyptian  doctrine  of  transmigration  differs  wide- 
ly from  the  Pythagorean. 

Throughout  the  Book  of  the  Dead,  the  identification  of  the  de- 
ceased with  Osiris,  or  assimilation  to  him,  is  taken  for  identification 
granted,  and  all  the  deities  of  the  family  of  Osiris  are  "^^^^  Osiris, 
supposed  to  perform  for  the  deceased  whatever  the  legend  records 
as  having  been  done  for  Osiris  himself.  Thus,  in  the  eighteenth 
chapter,  the  deceased  is  brought  before  a  series  of  divinities  in 
succession,  the  gods  of  Heliopolis,  Abydos,  and  other  localities,  and 
at  each  station  the  litany  begins : 


56  INTRODUCTION   TO 

O  Tehuti  [or  Thoth],  who  causest  Osiris  to  triumph  against  his  oppo- 
nents, cause  tlie  Osiris  (such  a  one)  to  triumph  against  his  opponents,  even 
as  thou  hast  made  Osiris  to  triumph  against  his  opj)onents. 

In  the  next  chapter,  which  is  another  recension  of  the  eighteenth, 
and  is  entitled  the  "Crown  of  Triumph,"  the  deceased  is  declared 
triumphant  forever,  and  all  the  gods  in  heaven  and  earth  repeat 
this,  and  the  chapter  ends  with  the  following : 

Horus  lias  repeated  this  dechiration  four  times,  and  all  his  enemies  fall 
prostrate  before  him  annihilated.  Horus,  the  son  of  Isis,  repeats  it  millions 
of  times,  and  all  his  enemies  fall  annihilated.  They  are  carried  off  to  the 
place  of  execution  in  the  East;  their  heads  are  cut  off,  their  necks  are  brok- 
en; their  thighs  are  severed,  and  delivered  up  to  the  great  destroyer  who 
dwells  in  Aati;  they  shall  not  come  forth  from  the  custody  of  Seb  forever. 

But  not  to  Osiris  only  is  the  deceased  assimilated.  In  the  forty- 
other  assimi-  second  chapter  every  limb  is  assimilated  to  a  different 
latious.  deity;   the  hair  to  Nu,  the   face  to  Ra,  the  eyes  to 

Hathor,  the  ears  to  Apuat,  the  nose  to  the  god  of  Sechem,  the  lips 
to  Anubis,  the  teeth  to  Selket,  and  so  on,  the  catalogue  ending  with 
the  words :  "  There  is  not  a  limb  in  him  without  a  god,  and  Tehuti 
is  a  safeguard  to  all  his  members."     Further  on  it  is  said : 

Not  men,  nor  gods,  nor  the  ghosts  of  tlie  departed,  nor  the  damned, 
past,  present,  or  future,  whoever  they  be,  can  do  him  hurt.  He  it  is  who 
Cometh  forth  in  safety.  "Whom  men  know  not"  is  his  name.  The  "Yes- 
terday which  sees  endless  years"  is  his  name,  passing  in  triumph  by  the 
roads  of  heaven.  The  deceased  is  the  Lord  of  eternity ;  he  is  reckoned  even 
as  Chepera;  he  is  the  master  of  the  kingly  crown. 

The  one  hundred  and  forty-ninth  chapter  gives  an  account  of  the 
Dangers  of  the  terrible  nature  of  certain  divinities  and  localities  which 
deceased.  the  deceased  must  encounter — gigantic  and  venomous 

serpents,  gods  with  names  significant  of  death  and  destruction, 
waters  and  atmospheres  of  flames.  But  none  of  these  prevail  over 
the  Osiris ;  he  passes  through  all  things  without  hai'm,  and  lives  in 
peace  with  the  fearful  gods  who  preside  over  these  abodes.  Some 
of  these  gods  remind  one  of  the  demons  in  Dante's  Infei-no.  But 
though  ministers  of  divine  justice,  their  nature  is  not  evil.  The 
following  are  invocations,  from  the  seventeenth  chapter,  to  be  used 
of  one  passing  through  these  dangers : 

O  Ra,  in  thine  egg,  radiant  in  thy  disk  shining  forth  from  the  horizon, 
swimming  over  the  steel  firmament,  sailing  over  the  pillars  of  Shu;  thou 
who  hast  no  second  among  the  gods,  who  producest  tlie  winds  by  the 
flames  of  thy  mouth,  and  who  enlightenest  the  worlds  with  thy  splendours, 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  57 

save  the  departed  from  that  god  whose  nature  is  a  mystery,  and  whose 
eyebrows  are  as  the  arms  of  the  l)alance  on  the  night  when  Aauit  was 
weighed,  .  .  .  O  Scarabaeiis  god  in  thy  bark,  whose  substance  is  self-orig- 
inated, save  the  Osiris  from  those  watchers  to  whom  the  Lord  of  spirits 
has  entrusted  the  observation  of  his  enemies,  and  from  whose  observations 
none  can  escape.  Let  me  not  fall  under  their  swords,  nor  go  to  tiieir 
blocks  of  execution ;  let  me  not  remain  in  their  abodes ;  let  me  not  rest  upon 
their  beds  [of  torment] ;  let  me  not  fall  into  their  nets.  Let  naught  befall 
me  which  the  gods  abhor. 

We  have  not  space  for  further  illustrations  of  this  most  interest- 
ing w^ork.  It  will  be  seen  how  this  Funeral  Ritual,  or  Book  of  the 
Dead,  embodies  the  Egyptian  doctrines  of  a  future  state,  and  the 
rewards  and  punishments  of  that  after  life.^  But  it  will  also  be 
observed  how  thoroughly  its  theology  is  blended  with  all  that  is 
superstitious  and  degrading  in  a  polytbeistic  mythology. 


The  Koran. 

The  Mohammedan  Bible  is  a  comparatively  modern  book,  and 
easily  accessible  to  English  readers.''  It  is  about  half  the  size  of 
the  Old  Testament,  and  contains  one  hundred  and  four-  General  char- 
teen  chapters,  called  Suras.  It  is  doubtful  whether  ^.cter. 
Mohammed  ever  learned  to  read  or  wadte.  He  dictated  his  revela- 
tions to  his  disciples,  and  they  wrote  them  on  date  leaves,  bits  of 
parchment,  tablets  of  white  stone,  and  shoulder-blades  of  sheep. 
These  were  written  during  the  last  twenty  years  of  the  prophet's 
life,  and  a  year  after  his  death  the  different  fragments  were  col- 
lected by  his  followers,  and  arranged  according  to  the  length  of  the 
chapters,  beginning  with  the  longest  and  ending  with  the  shortest. 
So  the  book,  as  regards  its  contents,  presents  a  strange  medley, 
having  no  real  beginning,  middle,  or  end.  And  yet  it  is  probably 
a  faithful  transcript  of  Mohammed's  mind  and  heart  as  exhibited 
during  the  latter  portion  of  his  life.  In  some  passages  he  seems  to 
have  been  inspired  with  a  holy  zeal,  and  eloquently  proclaims  the 
glory  of  Almighty  God,  the  merciful  and  compassionate.     Other 

'  See  J.  P.  Thompson's  Article  on  the  Egyptian  Doctrine  of  a  Future  State,  in  the 
Bibliotheca  Sacra,  January,  1868,  in  which  a  fair  analysis  of  the  teachings  of  the  Book 
of  the  Dead  is  given. 

'  Sale's  English  version  of  the  Koran  has  been  published  in  many  forms,  and  his 
Preliminary  Discourse  is  invaluable  for  the  study  of  Islam.  The  translation  of  Rev. 
I.  M.  Piodwell  (Lend.,  18G1)  has  the  Suras  arranged  in  chronological  order.  But  the 
recent  translation  by  E.  H.  Palmer  (vols,  vi  and  ix  of  Miiller's  Sacred  Books  of  the 
East)  is  undoubtedly  the  best  English  version. 


58  INTRODUCTION   TO 

passages  have  the  form  and  spirit  of  a  bulletin  of  -war.'  In  another  he 
seems  to  make  an  apology  for  taking  to  himself  an  additional  wife.* 
Another  suggests  a  political  manoeuvre.  But,  on  the  whole,  the 
Koran  is  a  most  tedious  book  to  read.  It  is  full  of  repetitions,  and 
seems  incapable  of  happy  translation  into  any  other  language.  Its 
crowning  glory  is  its  glowing  Arabic  diction.  "Regarding  it,"  says 
Palmer,  "from  a  perfectly  impartial  and  unbiassed  standpoint,  we 
iind  that  it  expresses  the  thoughts  and  ideas  of  a  Bedawi  Arab 
in  Bedawi  language  and  metaphor.  The  language  is  noble  and 
forcible,  but  it  is  not  elegant  in  the  sense  of  literary  refinement. 
To  Mohammed's  hearers  it  must  have  been  startling  from  the 
manner  in  which  it  brought  great  truths  home  to  them  in  the  lan- 
guage of  their  everyday  life.'"  Mohammed  was  wont  to  urge 
that  the  marvellous  excellence  of  his  book  was  a  standing  proof 
of  its  divine  and  superhuman  origin.  "  If  men  and  genii,"  says 
he,  "united  themselves  together  to  bring  the  like  of  this  Koran, 
they  could  not  bring  the  like,  though  they  should  back  each 
other  up  ! " " 

The  founder  of  Islam  appears  to  have  been  from  early  life  a 
Life  and  claims  Contemplative  soul.  In  the  course  of  his  travels  as  a 
of  Mohammed,  merchant  he  probably  often  met  and  talked  with  Jews 
and  Christians.  The  Koran  contains  on  almost  every  page  some 
allusion  to  Jewish  history  or  Christian  doctrine;  but  Mohammed's 
acquaintance  with  both  Judaism  and  Christianity  appears  to  have 
been  formed  from  oral  sources,  and  was  confused  with  many  vague 
and  silly  traditions.  It  should  be  observed,  too,  that  at  that  period 
an  earnest  seeker  after  truth,  under  circumstances  like  those  which 
tended  chiefly  to  fashion  Mohammed's  mind  and  character,  might 
very  easily  have  become  bewildered  by  the  various  traditions  of 
the  Jews  and  the  foolish  controversies  of  the  Christians.  The 
Church  was  then  distracted  with  controversy  over  the  Trinity  and 
the  use  of  images  in  worship.  To  Mohammed,  a  religion  which 
filled  its  churches  with  images  of  saints  was  no  better  than  a  gross 
idolatry.  His  knowledge  of  Jesus  Avas  gathered  largely  from  the 
apocryphal  gospels  and  through  Jewish  channels.  Hence  we  may 
understand  the  reason  of  the  perverted  form  in  which  so  many 
Christian  ideas  are  treated  in  the  Koran. 

Mohammed  claimed  to  be  the  last  of  six  great  apostles  who  had 
been  sent  upon  divine  missions  into  the  world.      Those  six  are 

*  Sura  iii,  135-145 ;  viii,  xl.     Coinp.  Muir,  Life  of  Mahomet,  vol.  iii,  p.  224. 
'Sura  xxxiii,  35^0;  Ixvi. 

'  The  Qur'an.     Translated  by  E.  H.  Palmer.     Introduction,  p.  Ixxvii. 

*  Koran,  Sura  xvii,  90. 


BIBLICAL    HERMEXEUTICS.  59 

Adam,  Noah,  Abraham,  Moses,  Jesus,  and  Mohammed.  Nothing 
specially  new  or  original  is  to  be  found  in  the  Moslem  bible.  It 
has  been  maintained  that  "Islam  was  little  else  than  a  republica- 
tion of  Judaism,  with  such  modifications  as  suited  it  to  Arabian  soil, 
plus  the  important  addition  of  the  prophetic  mission  of  Moham- 
med." ^  The  following  passage  from  the  fifth  Sura  well  illustrates 
the- general  style  of  the  Koran: 

[20]  God's  is  the  kingdom  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth  and  what  is 
between  the  two;  he  created  what  he  will,  for  God  is  mighty  over  all! 

But  the  Jews  and  the  Christians  say,  "  We  are  the  sons  of  God  and  his 
beloved."  Say,  "Why  then  does  he  punish  you  for  your  sins?"  nay,  ye 
are  mortals  of  those  whom  he  has  created!  He  pardons  whom  he  pleases, 
and  punishes  whom  he  pleases;  for  God's  is  the  kingdom  of  tlie  heavens 
and  the  earth,  and  what  is  between  the  two,  and  unto  him  the  journey  is. 

O  people  of  the  book !  our  apostle  has  come  to  you,  explaining  to  you 
the  interval  of  apostles ;  lest  ye  say,  "  There  came  not  to  us  a  herald  of 
glad  tidings  nor  a  waruer."  But  there  has  come  to  you  now  a  herald  of 
glad  tidings  and  a  warner,  and  God  is  mighty  over  all! 

When  Moses  said  to  his  people,  "O  my  people!  remember  the  favour  of 
God  toward  you  when  he  made  among  you  prophets,  and  made  for  you 
kings,  and  brought  you  what  never  was  brought  to  any  body  in  the 
worlds.  O  my  people!  enter  the  holy  laud  which  God  has  prescribed  for 
you;  and  be  ye  not  thrust  back  upon  your  hinder  parts  and  retreat  losers." 
[25]  They  said,  "O  Moses!  verily,  therein  is  a  people,  giants;  and  we 
will  surely  not  enter  therein  until  they  go  out  from  thence;  but  if  they  go 
out  then  we  will  enter  in."  Then  said  two  men  of  those  who  fear, — God 
had  been  gracious  to  them  both, — "Enter  ye  upon  them  by  the  door,  and 
when  ye  have  entered  it,  verily,  ye  shall  be  victorious;  and  upon  God  do 
ye  rely  if  ye  be  believers."  They  said,  "O  Moses!  we  shall  never  enter  it 
so  long  as  they  are  therein;  so,  go  thou  and  thy  Lord  and  fight  ye  twain; 
verily,  we  will  sit  down  here."  Said  he,  "My  Lord,  verily,  I  can  control 
only  myself  and  my  brother ;  therefore  part  us  from  these  sinful  people." 
He  said,  "Then,  verily,  it  is  forbidden  them;  for  forty  years  sluiU  they 
wander  about  in  the  earth;  so  vex  not  thyself  for  the  sinful  people." 

[30]  Recite  to  them  the  story  of  the  two  sons  of  Adam;  truly  wlien  they 
oft'ered  an  offering  and  it  was  accepted  from  one  of  tliem,  and  was  not 
accepted  from  the  other,  that  one  said,  "I  will  surely  kill  thee;"  he  said, 
"God  only  accepts  from  those  who  fear.  If  thou  dost  stretch  forth  to  me 
thine  hand  to  kill  me,  I  will  not  stretcli  forth  mine  hand  to  kill  thee; 
verily,  I  fear  God  the  Lord  of  the  worlds;  verily,  I  wish  that  thou  mayest 
draw  upon  thee  my  sin  and  thy  sin,  and  be  of  the  fellows  of  the  fire,  for 
tliiit  is  the  reward  of  the  unjust."  But  his  soul  allowed  him  to  slay  his 
brother,  and  he  slew  him,  and  in  the  morning  he  was  of  those  who  lose. 
And  God  sent  a  crow  to  scratch  in  the   earth  and  show  him  how  he  might 

'  Mohammed  and  Mohammedanism.  Lectures  by  E.  Bosworth  Smith,  p.  143.  New 
York,  1875. 


60  INTRODUCTION   TO 

hide  his  brother's  shame,  he  said,  "Alas,  for  me!  Am  I  too  helpless  to 
become  like  this  crow  and  hide  my  brother's  shame?"  and  in  the  morning 
he  was  of  those  who  did  repent. 

[35]  For  this  cause  have  we  prescribed  to  the  children  of  Israel  that 
whoso  kills  a  soul,  unless  it  be  for  another  soul  or  for  violence  in  the  land, 
it  is  as  though  he  had  killed  men  altogether;  but  whoso  saves  one,  it  is 
as  though  he  saved  men  altogether.' 

The  one  hundred  and  twelfth  Sura  is  held  in  special  veneration 

among  the   Mohammedans,  and  is  popularly  accounted    equal   in 

value  to  a  third  part  of  the  entire  Koran.     It  is  said  to  have  been 

revealed  in  answer  to  one  who  wished  to  know  the  distinguishing 

attributes    of    Mohammed's    God,       The    following    is    Palmer's 

version: 

In  the  name  of  the  merciful  and  compassionate  God 

Say,  He  is  God  alone! 

God  the  Eternal  ! 

He  begets  not,  and  is  not  begotten  ! 

Nor  is  there  like  unto  him  any  one! 

The  following  passage,  from  the  beginnmg  of  the  second  Sura, 
is  to  be  understood  as  the  words  of  the  Angel  Gabriel  to  Moham- 
med, and  showing  him  the  character  and  importance  of  the  Koran: 

That  is  the  book!  there  is  no  d()ul)t  therein;  a  guide  to  the  pious,  who 
believe  in  the  unseen,  and  are  steadfast  in  prayer,  and  of  what  we  have 
given  tliem  expend  in  alms;  wlio  believe  in  what  is  revealed  to  thee,  and 
what  was  revealed  before  thee,  and  of  the  hereafter  they  are  sure.  These 
are  in  guidance  from  their  Lord,  and  these  are  the  prosperous.  Verily, 
those  who  misljclieve,  it  is  the  same  to  them  if  ye  warn  them  or  if  ye  warn 
them  not,  tliey  will  not  believe.  God  has  set  a  seal  upon  their  hearts  and 
on  their  hearing;  and  on  tlieir  eyes  is  dimness,  and  for  them  is  grievous 
woe.  And  there  are  those  among  men  who  say,  "We  believe  in  God  and 
in  the  last  day;"  but  they  do  not  believe.  They  would  deceive  God  and 
tliose  who  do  believe ;  but  they  deceive  only  themselves  and  they  do  not 
perceive.  In  their  hearts  is  a  sickness,  and  God  has  made  them  still  more 
sick,  and  for  them  is  grievous  woe  because  they  lied.  And  when  it  is  said 
to  them,  "Do  not  evil  in  the  earth,"  they  say,  "We  do  but  what  is  right." 
Are  not  they  the  evil  doers  ?  and  yet  they  do  not  perceive.  And  when  it  is 
said  to  them,  ''Believe  as  other  men  believe,"  tliey  say,  "Shall  we  believe 
as  fools  believe  ? "  Are  not  they  themselves  the  fools?  and  yet  they  do 
not  know.  And  when  they  meet  those  who  believe,  they  say,  ''AVe  do 
believe;"  but  when  tliey  go  aside  with  their  devils,  they  say,  "We  are 
with  you;  we  were  but  mocking! "  God  shall  mock  at  them  and  let  them 
go  on  in  their  rebellion,  blindly  wandering  on.« 

-Palmer's  translation,  Part  I.,  pp.  100-102. 
"Ibid.,  pp.  2,  3. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  61 

The  following,  from  the  same  Sura,  is  a  specimen  of  the  manner 
in  which  Mohammed  garbles  and  presents  incidents  of  Israelitish 
history : 

Dost  thou  not  look  at  the  crowd  of  the  children  of  Israel  after  Moses' 
time,  when  they  said  to  a  prophet  of  theirs,  "  Raise  up  for  us  a  king,  and 
we  will  fight  iu  God's  way?  "  He  said,  ''  Will  ye  perhaps,  if  it  be  written 
down  for  you  to  fight,  refuse  to  fight  ? "  They  said,  "  And  why  should  we 
not  fight  in  God's  way,  now  that  we  are  dispossessed  of  our  homes  and 
sons?"  But  when  it  was  written  down  for  them  to  fight  they  turned 
back,  save  a  few  of  them,  and  God  knows  who  are  evil  doers.  Then  their 
prophet  said  to  them,  "Verily,  God  has  raised  up  for  you  Taiut  as  a 
king;"  they  said,  "How  can  the  kingdom  be  his  over  us;  we  have  more 
right  to  the  kingdom  than  he,  for  he  has  not  an  amplitude  of  wealth?" 
He  said,  "Verily,  God  has  chosen  him  over  you,  and  has  provided  him 
■with  an  extent  of  knowledge  and  of  form.  God  gives  the  kingdom  unto 
whom  he  will;  God  comprehends  and  knows." 

Then  said  to  them  their  prophet,  "  The  sign  of  his  kingdom  is  that  tliere 
shall  come  to  you  the  ark  with  the  shechinah  iu  it  from  your  Lord,  and  the 
relics  of  what  the  family  of  Moses  and  the  family  of  Aaron  left ;  the  angels 
shall  bear  it."     In  that  is  surely  a  sign  to  you  if  ye  believe. 

Whatever  opinion  we  may  form  of  the  Koran,  or  of  Islam,  it 
must  be  conceded  that  the  man,  who,  like  Mohammed,  in  one 
generation  organized  a  race  of  savage  tribes  into  a  united  people, 
founded  an  empire  which  for  more  than  a  thousand  years  has 
covered  a  territory  as  extensive  as  that  of  Rome  in  her  proudest 
days,  and  established  a  religion  which  to-day  numbers  over  a 
hundred  million  adherents,  must  have  been  an  extraordinary  char- 
acter, and  his  life  and  works  must  be  worthy  of  careful  philosophic 
study.  But  it  will  also  be  conceded,  by  all  competent  to  judge, 
that,  as  a  volume  of  sacred  literature,  the  Koran  is  very  deficient 
in  those  elements  of  independence  and  originality  which  are  notice- 
able in  the  sacred  books  of  the  other  great  religions  of  the  world. 
The  strict  Mohammedans  regard  every  syllable  of  the  Koran  as  of 
a  directly  divine  origin.  "The  divine  revelation,"  observes  Muir, 
"  was  the  cornerstone  of  Islam.  The  recital  of  a  passage  formed 
an  essential  part  of  every  celebration  of  public  worship;  and  its 
private  perusal  and  repetition  was  enforced  as  a  duty  and  a  privi- 
lege, fraught  with  the  richest  religious  merit.  This  is  the  uni- 
versal voice  of  early  tradition,  and  may  be  gathered  from  the 
revelation  itself.  The  Koran  was  accordingly  committed  to 
memory  more  or  less  by  every  adherent  of  Islam,  and  the  extent 
to  which  it  could  be  recited  was  reckoned  one  of  the  chief  dis- 
tinctions of  nobility  in  the  early  Moslem  empire.     The  custom  of 


63  INTRODUCTION  TO 

Arabia  favoured  the  task.  Passionately  fond  of  poetry,  yet  pos- 
sessed of  but  limited  means  and  skill  in  committing  to  writing  the 
effusions  of  their  bards,  the  Arabs  had  long  been  habituated  to 
imprint  them  on  the  living  tablets  of  their  hearts.  The  recol- 
lective  faculty  was  thus  cultivated  to  the  highest  pitch;  and  it  was 
applied  with  all  the  ardour  of  an  awakened  Arab  spirit  to  the 
Koran.  Several  of  Mohammed's  followers,  according  to  early  tra- 
dition, could,  during  his  lifetime,  repeat  with  scrupulous  accuracy 
the  entire  revelation." ' 

TuE   Eddas. 

Two  ancient  collections  of  Scandinavian  poems  and  legends, 
known  as  the  Elder  and  the  Younger  Edda,  embody  the 
acter  of  the  mythology  of  the  Teutonic  tribes  which  settled  in  early 
^'  times  in  the  sea-girt  lands  of  Denmark,  Sweden,  and 
Norway.  From  these  tribes  migrated  also  the  ancient  colonists  of 
Iceland.  To  these  old  Norsemen  the  Eddas  hold  a  position  corre- 
sponding to  that  of  the  Vedas  among  the  ancient  Hindus,  and  the 
Avesta  among  the  Persians. 

In  the  old  Norse  language  the  word  Edda  means  ancestress,  or 
great-grandmother.  Probably  the  poems  and  traditions  so  named 
were  long  perpetuated  orally  by  the  venerable  mothers,  Avho  repeated 
them  to  their  children  and  children's  children  at  the  blazing  fire- 
sides of  those  northern  homes.  The  Elder  Edda,  often  called  the 
Poetic  Edda,  consists  of  thirty-nine  poems,  and  would  nearly  equal 
in  size  the  books  of  Psalms  and  Proverbs  combined.  The  Younger 
or  Prose  Edda  is  a  collection  of  the  myths  of  the  Scandinavian 
deities,  and  furnishes  to  some  extent  a  commentary  on  the  older 
Edda,  from  the  songs  of  which  it  quotes  frequently.  These  inter- 
esting works  were  quite  unknown  to  the  learned  world  until  the 
latter  part  of  the  seventeenth  century.  But  it  appears  that  the 
poems  of  the  older  Edda  were  collected  about  the  beginning  of  the 
twelfth  century  by  Saemund  Sigfusson,  an  Icelandic  priest,  who, 
after  pursuing  classical  and  theological  studies  in  the  universities  of 
France  and  Germany,  returned  to  Iceland  and  settled  in  a  village  at 
the  foot  of  Mount  Ilecla.  Whether  he  collected  these  poems  from 
oral  tradition,  or  from  runic  manuscripts  or  inscriptions,  is  uncertain. 
A  copy  of  this  Edda  on  vellum,  believed  to  date  from  the  fourteenth 
century,  was  found  in  Iceland  by  Bishop  Sveinsson  in  1G43,  and  was 
subsequently  published  under  the  title  of  The  Edda  of  Saemund 
the  Learned.'     The  prose  Edda  is  ascribed  to  the  celebrated  Ice- 

'  The  Life  of  Mahomet,  vol.  i.     Introduction,  p.  5.     London,  18C1. 
'  Edda  Sucmundar  hind  Froda,  Copenhagen.    3  vols.    1787-1828.     The  third  volume 
contains  the  Lexicon  Mythologicum  of  Finn  Magnusson. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  63 

landic  historian,  Snorri  Sturlason  (born  1178),  who  probably  collect- 
ed its  several  parts  from  oral  tradition  and  other  sources.     The  first 
copy  known  to  Europeans  was  found  by  Jonsson  in  1628,  and  the  first 
complete  edition  was  published  by  Rask,  at  Stockholm,  in  1818.' 
The  fii'st,  and  perhaps  oldest,  poem  of  the  Elder  Edda  is  entitled 

the  Voluspa,  that  is,  the  Sonsr  of  the  Prophetess.     It 

.  ...  1  •  r      ^  .  The  Voluspa. 

narrates  m  poetic  form  the  creation  ot    tne  universe 

and  of  man,  the  origin  of  evil,  and  how  death  entered  into  the 

world.     It  speaks   of  a  future  destruction  and  renovation  of  the 

universe,  and   of  the  abodes  of  bliss  and  woe.      The  prophetess 

thus  begins  her  song: 

1.  All  noble  souls,  yield  me  devout  cattention, 
Ye  high  and  low  of  Heimdall's  race," 

I  will  All-Father's  works  make  known, 
The  oldest  sayings  which  I  call  to  mind. 

2.  Of  giants  eight  was  I  first  born, 
They  reared  me  up  from  ancient  times; 
Nine  worlds  I  know,  nine  limbs  I  know 
Of  that  strong  trunk  within  the  earth.' 

3.  In  that  far  age  when  Ymir*  lived, 
There  was  no  sand,  nor  sea,  nor  saline  wave; 
Earth  there  was  not,  nor  lofty  heaven, 

A  yawning  deep,  but  verdure  none, 

4.  Until  Bor's  sons  the  spheres  upheaved, 
And  they  the  mighty  Midgard^  formed. 

'  An  English  translation  of  the  Poetic  Edda  was  published  by  Benjamin  Thorpe 
(Two  parts,  London,  1866),  but  is  now  out  of  print.  Comp.  Icelandic  Poetry,  or  the 
Edda  of  Saemund  translated  into  English  verse  by  A.  S.  Cottle  (Bristol,  1797).  Many 
fragments  of  the  lays  are  given  in  Anderson's  Norse  Mythology  (Chicago,  1880). 
An  English  translation  of  the  Prose  Edda  is  given  in  Blackwell's  edition  of  Mallet's 
Northern  Antiquities  (Bohn's  Antiquarian  Library).  A  new  translation  by  R.  B. 
Anderson  has  been  published  at  Chicago  (1880).  A  very  complete  and  convenient 
German  translation  of  both  Eddas,  with  explanations  by  Karl  Simrock,  has  passed 
through  many  editions  (seventh  improved  edition,  Stuttgart,  1878). 

*  Heimdall,  according  to  the  old  Norse  mythology,  was  the  father  and  founder  of 
the  different  classes  of  men,  nobles,  churls,  and  thralls. 

^  Referring  to  the  great  mundane  ash-tree  where  the  gods  assemble  every  day  in 

council.     This  tree  strikes  its  roots  through  all  worlds,  and  is  thus  described  in  the 

nineteenth  verse  of  the  Voluspa : 

An  ash  I  know  named  Yggdrasil, 

A  lofty  tree  wet  with  white  mist, 

Tlience  comes  the  dew  which  in  the  valleys  falls ; 

Ever  green  it  stands  o'er  the  Urdar-fount. 

*  Ymir  was  the  progenitor  of  the  giants,  and  out  of  his  body  the  world  was  created. 
®  The  Prose  Edda  explains  that  the  earth  is  round  without,  and  encircled  by  the 

ocean,  the  outward  shores  of  which  were  assigned  to  the  race  of  "iants.     But  around 


04  INTRODUCTION  TO 

The  southern  sun  shone  on  the  cliffs 

And  green  the  ground  became  with  plants. 

5.  The  southern  sun,  the  moon's  companion, 
Held  with  right  hand  the  steeds  of  heaven. 
The  sun  knew  not  where  she'  might  set, 
The  moon  knew  not  what  power  he  *  had, 
The  stars  knew  not  where  they  might  dwell. 

6.  Then  went  the  Powers  to  judgment  seats, 
The  gods  most  holy  lield  a  council, 

To  night  and  new  moon  gave  they  names, 
They  named  the  morning  and  the  midday, 
And  evening,  to  arrange  the  times." 

Another  very  interesting  poem  is  the  Grimnis-mal,  or  Lay  of 
Grimner,  in  which  we  find  a  description  of  the  twelve  habitations 
of  heavenly  deities,  by  which  some  scholars  understand  the  twelve 
signs  of  the  zodiac.  The  sixth  poem  is  called  the  Hava-mal,  or 
Sublime  Lay.  It  is  an  ethical  poem,  embodying  a  considerable  col- 
lection of  ancient  Norse  proverbs.  The  following  passages,  from 
Bishop  Percy's  prose  translation,  are  specimens : 

1.  Consider  and  examine  Avell  all  your  doors  before  you  venture  to  stir 
abroad ;  for  he  is  exposed  to  continual  danger,  whose  enemies  lie  in  am- 
bush concealed  in  his  court. 

3.  To  the  guest,  who  enters  your  dwelling  with  frozen  knees,  give  the 
warmth  of  your  fire:  he  who  hath  travelled  over  the  mountains  hath  need 
of  food,  and  well-dried  garments. 

4.  Offer  water  to  him  who  sits  down  at  your  table ;  for  he  hath  occasion 
to  cleanse  his  hands:  and  entertain  him  honourably  and  kindly,  if  you 
would  win  from  him  friendly  words  and  a  grateful  return. 

5.  He  wl'.o  travelleth  hath  need  of  wisdom.  One  may  do  at  home  what- 
soever one  will:  but  he  wlio  is  isrnorant  of  good  manners  will  onlv  draw 
contempt  upon  himself,  when  he  comes  to  sit  down  with  men  well  instructed. 

7.  He  who  goes  to  a  feast,  where  he  is  not  expected,  either  speaks  with 
a  lowly  voice,  or  is  silent;  he  listens  with  his  ears,  and  is  attentive  with 
his  eyes;  by  this  he  acquires  knowledge  and  wisdom. 

8.  Happy  he,  who  draws  upon  himself  the  applause  and  benevolence  of 
men!  for  whatever  depends  upon  the  will  of  others,  is  hazardous  and  un- 
certain. 

a  portion  of  the  inland  Odin,  Vile,  and  Ve,  the  sons  of  Bor,  raised  a  bulwark  against 
turbulent  giants,  and  to  the  portion  of  the  earth  wliich  it  encircled  they  gave  the  name 
of  Midgard.  For  this  structure,  it  is  said,  they  used  the  eyebrows  of  Ymir,  of  his  flesh 
they  formed  the  land,  of  his  sweat  and  blood  the  seas,  of  his  bones  the  mountains, 
of  his  hair  the  trees,  of  his  brains  the  clouds,  and  of  his  skull  the  vault  of  lieaven. 
See  Mallet,  Northern  Antiquities,  pp.  98,  405.     Anderson,  Norse  Mythology,  p.  176. 

'  In  the  Norse  language,  sun  is  feminine  and  moon  is  masculine. 

*  Translated  from  Simrock's  German  version  of  the  Voluspa. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  65 

10.  A  man  can  carry  with  him  no  better  provision  for  his  journey  than 
the  strength  of  understanding.  In  a  foreign  country  this  will  be  of  more 
use  to  him  than  treasures;  and  will  introduce  liim  to  the  table  of  strangers. 

12-13.  A  man  cannot  carry  a  worse  custom  with  him  to  a  banquet  than 
that  of  drinking  too  much ;  the  more  the  drunkard  swallows,  the  less  is 
his  wisdom,  till  he  loses  his  reason.  Tlie  bird  of  oblivion  sings  before 
those  who  inebriate  themselves,  and  steals  away  their  souls.' 

We  add  a  single  extract  from  the  Prose  Edda,  the  account  of  the 
formation  of  the  first  human  pair  : 

One  day,  as  the  sons  of  Bor  were  walking  along  the  sea-beach  they  found 
two  stems  of  wood,  out  of  which  they  shaped  a  man  and  a  woman.  The 
first  (Odin)  infused  into  them  life  and  spirit;  the  second  (Vile)  endowed 
them  with  reason  and  the  power  of  motion;  the  third  (Ve)  gare^  them 
speech  and  features,  hearing  and  vision.  The  man  they  called  Ask,  and 
the  woman,  Embla.  From  these  two  descend  the  whole  human  race,  whose 
assigned  dwelling  was  within  Midgard.  Then  the  sons  of  Bor  built  in  the 
middle  of  the  universe  the  city  called  Asgard,  where  dwell  th&gods  and 
their  kindred,  and  from  that  abode  work  out  so  many  wondrous  things, 
both  on  the  earth  and  in  tlie  heavens  above  it.  There  is  in  that  city  a  place 
called  Hlidskjalf,  and  when  Odin  is  seated  there  on  his  lofty  throne  he  sees 
over  the  whole  world,  discerns  all  the  actions  of  men,  jind  comprehends 
whatever  he  contemplates.  His  wife  is  FiiLrga,  the  daughter  of  Fjorgyn, 
and  tliey  and  their  offspring  form  the  race  that  we  call  the  jEsir,  a  race 
that  dwells  in  Asgard  the  old,  and  the  regions  around  it,  and  that  we  know 
to  be  entirely  divine.  Wherefore  Odin  may  justly  be  called  All-Father,  for 
he  is  verily  the  father  of  all,  of  gods  as  well  as  of  men,  and  to  his  power 
all  things  owe  their  existence.  Earth  is  his  daughter  and  his  wife,  and 
with  her  he  had  his  first-born  son,  Asa-Thor,  who  is  endowed  with  strength 
and  valour,  and  therefore  quelleth  he  everything  that  hath  life.* 

In  all  the  voluminous  literature  of  the  Greeks  and  the  Romans 
we  find  no  single  work  or  collection  of  writings  analogous  to  the 
above-named  sacred  books.^  It  would  not  be  difficult  to  comj^ile 
from  Greek  and  Roman  poets  and  philosophers  a  body  of  sacred 
literature  which  would  compare  favourably  with  that  of  any  of  the 
Gentile  nations.  But  such  a  compilation  woiild  have,  as  a  volume, 
no  recognized  authority  or  national  significance.  The  books  we 
have  described,  like  our  own  Bible,  have  had  a  historical  develop- 
ment, and  a  distinct  i>lace  in  the  religious  culture  of  great  nations. 

'  See  the  whole  poem  as  translated  by  Tliorpe  in  Anderson's  Norse  Mythology,  pp. 
130-15.5,  and  the  mysterious  Runic  section  on  pp.  254-259. 

*  Blackwell's  translation,  in  Mallet,  Xorthern  Antiquities,  pp.  405,  406. 

'  Whatever  may  have  been  the  nature  and  contents  of  the  old  Sibylline  Books, 
which  were  kept  in  the  Temple  of  Jupiter  Capitolinus  at  Rome,  they  perished  long 
ago,  and  their  real  character  and  use  are  now  purely  matters  of  conjecture. 
5 


66  INTRODUCTION   TO 

The  Koran,  the  Avesta,  the  Pitakas,  and  the  Chinese  classics  em- 
body the  precepts  and  laws  which  have  been  a  rule  of  faith  to  mill- 
ions. The  vedic  hymns  and  the  Egyptian  ritual  have  directed  the 
devotions  of  countless  generations  of  earnest  worshippers.  They 
are,  therefore,  to  be  accounted  sacred  books,  and  are  invaluable  for 
the  study  of  history  and  of  comparative  theology.' 

In  forming  a  proper  estimate  of  these  bibles  of  the  nations,  we 

^   ,     must  take  each  one  as  a  whole.     In  the  brief  citations 

These      books 

must  be  studied  we  have  given  above,  the  reader  can  only  learn  the 
as  a  whole.  general  tone  and  spirit  of  the  best  portions  of  the  sev- 
eral books.  The  larger  part  of  all  of  them  is  filled  with  either  un- 
trustworthy legends,  or  grotesque  fancies  and  vague  speculations. 
They  abound  in  polytheistic  superstitions,  incomprehensible  meta- 
physics, and  mythological  tales.  But,  doubtless,  back  of  all  this 
mass  of  accumulated  song  and  superstition  and  legend,  there  Avas 
once  a  foundation  of  comparatively  pure  worship  and  belief.  Even 
Mohammed,  whose  life  and  works  stand  out  in  the  light  of  reliable 
history,  appears  to  have  been,  at  the  beginning  of  his  career,  an 
earnest  seeker  after  truth  and  a  zealous  reformer.  But  afterward 
the  pride  of  power  and  numerous  victories  warped  his  moral  integ- 
rity, and  later  portions  of  the  Koran  are  apologies  for  his  crimes. 
It  is  difficult  to  see  what  logical  connexion  the  superstitions  of 
modern  Taoism  have  with  the  teachings  of  Laotzse.  In  fact,  the 
original  documents  and  ideas  of  most  of  the  great  religions  of  the 
East  appear  to  have  become  lost  in  the  midst  of  the  accretions  of 
later  times.  Especially  is  this  true  of  Brahmanism  and  Buddhism. 
Who  can  now  certainly  declare  what  were  the  very  words  of  Bud- 
dha? The  Tripitaka  is  an  uncertain  guide.  It  is  much  as  if  the 
apocryphal  gospels,  the  legends  of  anchorites  and  monks  and  mys- 
tics, and  the  dreams  of  the  schoolmen,  were  all  strung  together, 
and  intermingled  with  the  words  and  works  of  Jesus.  Roman 
Catholicism  is  itself  a  gross  corruption  and  caricature  of  the  religion 
of  Jesus  Christ;  and  were  it  the  sole  representative  of  the  Gospel 
in  the  world  to-day  it  would  be  a  striking  analogue  of  Buddhism. 
Could  we  go  back  to  the  true  historical  starting  point  of  the  great 
religions,  we  would,  perhaps,  find  them  all,  in  one  form  and  another, 

'  The  Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Sikhs,  a  politico-religious  sect  of  India,  constitute  a 
volume  full  of  interest,  and  equal  in  size  to  the  Old  Testament.  It  is  commonly 
known  as  the  Granth.  But  it  is  a  late  work,  compiled  about  A.  D.  1500,  and  has  no 
national  or  historical  value  to  entitle  it  to  a  ])lace  among  the  bibles  of  the  uittioiis.  It 
has  been  translated  into  English,  and  published  at  the  expense  of  the  Biitish  (iovern- 
ment  for  India.  See  The  Adi  Granth,  or  the  Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Sikhs,  translated 
from  the  original  Gurmukhi,  with  Introductory  Essays,  by  Dr.  Ernest  Tiirumpp. 
Lond.,  18Y7. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  67 

connected  with   some   great   patriarchal  Jethro,   or   Melchizedek, 
whose  name  and  genealogy  are  now  alike  lost  to  mankind. 

It  will  not  do  to  take  up  the  various  bibles  of  the  world,  and, 
having  selected  choice  extracts  from  them  all,  compare  such  selec- 
tions alone  with  similar  extracts  from  the  Christian  and  Jewish 
Scriptures.  These  latter,  we  doubt  not,  can  furnish  more  exquisite 
passages  than  all  the  others  combined.  But  such  comparison  of 
choice  excerpts  is  no  real  test.  Each  bible  must  be  taken  as  an 
organic  whole,  and  viewed  in  its  historical  and  national  Notable snperi- 
relations.     Then  will  it  be  seen,  as  one  ci'owning  glory  ority  of  the  oid 

and  New  Tes- 

of  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  that  tament  scrip- 
they  are  the  carefully  preserved  productions  of  some  *"'''^^' 
sixteen  centuries,  self-verifying  in  their  historical  relations,  and 
completed  and  divinely  sanctioned  by  the  Founder  of  Christian- 
ity and  his  apostles  in  the  most  critical  and  cultivated  age  of 
the  Roman  Empire.  All  attempts  to  resolve  these  sacred  books 
into  myths  and  legends  have  proved  signal  failures.  The  Hebrew 
people  were  notably  a  peculiar  people,  and  their  national  history 
stands  out  in  the  clear  light  of  trustworthy  testimony.  They  were 
placed,  geographically,  in  the  very  center  of  the  great  historic 
empires  of  Egypt,  Asia,  and  Europe;  and  the  accuracy  of  their 
sacred  records  is  confirmed  by  the  records  of  these  empires.  Most 
notable  is  the  fact,  moreover,  that  the  languages  in  which  the 
several  parts  of  the  sacred  canon  were  written  ceased  to  be  living 
tongues  about  the  time  when  those  several  parts  obtained  canonical 
authority;  and  thereby  these  sacred  books  were  crystallized  into 
imperishable  form,  and  have  become  historical  and  linguistic  mon- 
uments of  their  own  genuineness.  We  are,  furthermore,  confident 
in  the  assertion  that  the  Holy  Scriptures  are  not  only  singularly 
free  from  the  superstitions  and  follies  that  abound  in  the  sacred 
books  of  other  nations,  but  also  that  they  contain  in  substance  the 
inculcation  of  every  excellence  and  virtue  to  be  found  in  all  the 
others.  Thus  in  their  entirety  they  are  incomparably  superior  to 
all  other  sacred  books.' 

But,  taken  in  parts,  the  Bible  will  still  maintain  a  marvellous 
superiority.  Where,  in  all  other  literature,  wdll  be  found  a  moral 
code  comparable,  for  substance  and  historical  presentation,  with  the 
Sinaitic  decalogue?      Whei-e    else    is    there   such    a   golden    sum- 

' "  It  cannot  be  too  strongly  stated,"  saj'S  Max  Muller,  "  that  the  chief,  and  in  many 
cases  the  only,  interest  of  the  Sacred  Books  of  the  East  is  historical ;  that  much  in 
them  is  extremely  childish,  tedious,  if  not  repulsive ;  and  that  no  one  but  the  historian 
•will  be  able  to  understand  the  important  lessons  which  they  teach."  Sacred  Books  of 
the  East,  vol.  i,  p.  xliii. 


68  INTRODUCTION   TO 

raary  of  all  law  and  revelation  as  the  first  and  second  command- 
ments of  the  Saviour?  The  religions  lessons  of  the  Bible  are 
set  in  a  historical  background  of  national  life  and  personal  experi- 
ence; and  largely  in  biographical  sketches  true  to  all  the  phases  of 
human  character.'  Let  the  diligent  student  go  patiently  and  care- 
fully through  all  rival  scriptures;  let  him  memorize  the  noblest 
vedic  hymns,  and  study  the  Tripitaka  with  all  the  enthusiasm  of  an 
Edwin  Arnold;  let  him  search  the  Confucian  classics,  and  the  Tau- 
teh-king  of  Laotsze,  and  the  sacred  books  of  Persia,  Assyria,  and 
Babylon;  let  him  devoutly  peruse  Egyptian  ritual,  Moslem  Koran, 
and  Scandinavian  Eddas;  he  yet  will  find  in  the  Psalms  of  David  a 
beauty  and  purity  infinitely  superior  to  any  thing  in  the  Vedas; 
in  the  gospels  of  Jesus  a  glory  and  splendour  eclipsing  the  boasted 
"Light  of  Asia;"  and  in  the  laws  of  Moses  and  the  Proverbs 
of  Solomon  lessons  of  moral  and  political  wisdom  far  in  advance 
of  any  thing  that  Laotsze  and  Confucius  offer.  By  such  study 
and  comparisons  it  will  be  seen,  as  not  before,  how,  as  a  body  of 
laws,  history,  poetry,  prophecy,  and  religious  records,  the  Bible  is 
most  emphatically  the  Book  of  books,  and,  above  all  other  books 
combined,  "profitable  for  doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for 
instruction  in  righteousness."  Such  study  will  dissipate  the  notion 
that  Christianity  is  equivalent  to  general  goodness,  and  that  the 
Bible  is  an  accident  of  human  history;  for  it  Avill  bo  seen  that  the 
Gospel  system  essentially  excludes  all  other  religions,  and  evinces 
a  divine  right  to  supersede  them  all.  The  written  records  of  other 
faiths  are  of  the  earth  and  earthy;  the  Bible  is  a  heavenly  gift,  in 
language  and  history  wonderfully  prepared,  and  accompanied  by 
manifold  evidences  of  being  the  revelation  of  God.  To  devotees 
of  other  religions  the  Christian  may  truly  say,  in  the  words  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  (John  iv,  22):  "Ye  worship  what  ye  know  not,  we  wor- 
ship what  we  know,  for  the  salvation  is  from  the  Jews." 

'  Tayler  Lewis  observes :  "  Every  other  assumed  revelation  has  been  addressed  to 
but  one  pliase  of  humanity.  They  have  been  adapted  to  one  age,  to  one  people,  or 
one  peculiar  style  of  human  thought.  Their  books  have  never  assumed  a  cosmical 
character,  or  been  capable  of  any  catholic  expansion.  They  could  never  be  ac- 
commodated to  other  ages,  or  acclimated  to  other  parts  of  the  world.  They  are  indig- 
enous plants  that  can  never  grow  out  of  the  zone  that  gave  them  birth.  Zoroaster 
never  made  a  disciple  beyond  Persia,  or  its  inunediate  neighborhood ;  Confucius  is 
wholly  Chinese,  as  Socrates  is  wholly  Greek."  The  Divine  Human  in  the  Scripture, 
p.  133.     New  York,  1859. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  69 


CHAPTER  III. 

LANGUAGES  OF  THE  BIBLE. 

A  THOROUGH  acquaintance  with  the  genius  and  grammatical  struc- 
ture of  the  original  languages  of  the  Bible  is  essen-  Acquaintance 
tially  the  basis  of  all  sound  interpretation.  A  transla-  J^'^j^  *^^^^  ^'"•s- 
tion,  however  faithful,  is  itself  an  interpretation,  and  of  scripture  the 
cannot  be  safely  made  a  substitute  for  original  and  in-  ggu^^  ''mter- 
dependent  investigation.  As  an  introduction,  there-  pretation. 
fore,  to  Biblical  Hermeneutics,  it  is  of  the  first  importance  that  we 
have  a  knowledge  of  those  ancient  tongues  in  which  the  sacred 
oracles  were  written.  It  is  important,  also,  that  we  make  our- 
selves familiar  with  the  general  principles  of  linguistic  science,  the 
growth  of  families  of  languages,  and  the  historical  position,  as  well 
as  the  most  marked  characteristics,  of  the  sacred  tongues. 

Origin  and  Growth  of  Languages. 

The  origin  of  human  speech  has  been  a  fruitful  theme  of  specu- 
lation and  controversy.  One's  theory  on  the  subject  is  origin  of  lan- 
likely  to  be  governed  by  his  theory  of  the  origin  of  suage. 
man.  If  we  adopt  the  theory  of  evolution,  according  to  which 
man  has  been  gradually  developed,  by  some  process  of  natural 
selection,  from  lower  forms  of  animal  life,  we  will  very  naturally 
conclude  that  language  is  a  human  invention,  constructed  by  slow 
degrees  to  meet  the  necessities  and  conditions  of  life.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  we  hold  that  man  was  first  introduced  on  earth  by  a 
miraculous  creation,  and  was  made  at  the  beginning  a  perfect 
specimen  of  his  kind,  we  will  very  naturally  conclude  that  the 
beginnings  of  human  language  were  of  supernatural  origin. 

Several  theories  have  been  advanced  to  show  that  language  may 
have  had  a  human  origin.  According  to  one  theory,  various  theo- 
maintained  by  several  eminent  philologists,  such  as  ^^• 
K.  W.  L.  Heyse,  H.  Steinthal,  and  Max  Miiller,  man  was  originally 
endowed  with  a  creative  faculty  which  spontaneously  gave  a  name 
to  each  distinct  conception  as  it  first  thrilled  through  his  brain. 
There  was  originally  such  a  sympathy  between  soul  and  body,  and 
such  a  dependence  of  the  one  upon  the  other,  that  every  object, 


• 


70  INTRODUCTION  TO 

which  in  any  way  affected  the  senses,  produced  a  corresponding 
The  Automatic  echo  in  the  soul,  and  found  automatic  expression 
Theory.  through  the  vocal  organs.      As  gold,   tin,  wood,  and 

stone  have  each  a  different  ring  or  sound  when  struck,  so  the 
different  sensations  and  perceptions  of  man's  soul  rang  out  articu- 
late sounds  whenever  they  were  impressed  by  objects  from  without 
or  intuitions  from  Avithiu.  This  may  properly  be  called  the  auto- 
matic theory  of  the  origin  of  speech.  Others  adopt  a  theory 
The  onomato-  which  may  be  called  onomatopoetic.  It  traces  the 
poetic  Theory,  origin  of  words  to  an  imitation  of  natural  sounds. 
Animals,  according  to  this  theory,  would  receive  names  corre- 
sponding to  their  natural  utterances.  The  noises  caused  by  the 
winds  and  waters  would  suggest  names  for  these  objects  of  nature. 
The  interjec-  ^^d  in  this  way  a  few  simple  words  would  come  to 
tionai  Theory,  form  the  germs  of  the  first  language.  Then,  again, 
there  is  the  interjectional  theory,  Avhich  seeks  for  the  radical  ele- 
ments of  language  in  the  sudden  ejaculations  of  excited  passion 
or  desire. 

Against  all  these  theories  strong  arguments  may  be  urged.  In- 
Objections  to  terjections  and  onomatopoetic  words  are  in  every  lan- 
these  theories,  guage  comparatively  few,  and  can  in  no  proper  sense 
be  regarded  as  the  radical  elements  of  speech.  "  Language  begins 
where  interjections  end."  The  two  theories  last  named  will  ac- 
count for  the  origin  of  many  words  in  all  languages,  but  not  for 
the  origin  of  language  itself.  The  automatic  theory  assumes  too 
materialistic  and  mechanical  a  notion  of  lanffuatre-makinsf  to  com- 
mand  general  acceptance.  It  has  been  nicknamed  the  ding-dong 
theory,  for  it  resolves  the  first  men  into  bells,  mechanically  ringing 
forth  vocal  sounds,  and,  as  Whitney  has  humorously  added,  like 
other  bells  they  rang  by  the  tongue.  But  Miiller,  on  the  o^her 
hand,  rejects  both  the  other  theories,  and  stigmatizes  the  onomato- 
poetic as  the  boto-ioow  theory,  and  the  interjectional  as  the  pooh- 
pooh  theory.  Thus  the  most  eminent  philologists  reject  and  spurn 
each  other's  theories. 

Whitney  has  argued  that,  since  nineteen-twentieths  of  our  speech 
is  manifestly  of  human  origin,  it  is  but  reasonable  to  suppose  that 
the  other  twentieth  originated  in  the  same  way.'  But  such  an 
argument  cannot  be  allowed,  for  it  is  precisely  with  this  unknown 
twentieth  that  all  the  difficulty  lies.  Nor  is  it  really  so  much  the 
twentieth  as  the  one  thousandth  part.  We  can  readily  trace  the 
causes  and  methods  by  which  languages  have  been  multiplied  and 
changed,  but  how  the  first  man  began  to  speak — not  merely  utter 
'  Language  and  the  Study  of  Language,  p.  400. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  71 

articulate  sounds,  but  frame  sentences  and  communicate  ideas — is 
quite  another  question.  Necessity  may  have  compelled  him  to 
make  clothing,  build  houses,  and  fabricate  implements  of  art ;  but 
in  all  such  cases  he  somewhere  found  the  raw  material  at  hand. 
He  did  not  originate  the  clay  and  the  trees  and  the  stones.  But 
the  origin  of  human  language  seems,  from  the  nature  of  the  case, 
to  involve  the  creation  of  the  material  as  well  as  the  putting  it 
in  form. 

If  we  believe  that  man  was  originally  created  upright,  with  all 
his  natural  faculties  complete,  a  most  obvious  corollary  origin  probably 
is,  that  language  was  directly  imparted  to  him  by  his  supernatural. 
Creator.  He  learned  his  first  mode  of  speech  from  God,  or  from 
angelic  beings,  whom  God  commissioned  to  instruct  him.  Perhaps 
the  original  creation  involved  with  it  a  power  in  the  first  man  to 
speak  spontaneously.  He  named  whatever  he  would  name  as  in- 
tuitively as  the  bird  builds  its  nest,  and  as  naturally  as  the  first  bud 
put  forth  its  inflorescence;  but,  unlike  bird  and  bud,  his  original 
power  for  speaking  was  a  conscious  capability  of  the  soul,  and  not, 
as  the  automatic  theory  assumes,  a  peculiarity  of  the  vocal  organs. 
Language  is  not  an  accident  of  human  nature ;  else  might  it  utterly 
perish  like  other  arts  and  inventions  of  man.  It  is  an  essential  ele- 
ment of  man's  being,  and  one  which  ever  distinguishes  him  from 
the  brute.  Nor  is  it  ingenuous  or  honourable  in  linguists  to  ignore 
the  statements  of  Scripture  on  this  subject.  The  account  of  Adam 
naming  the  creatures  brought  to  him  (Gen.  ii,  19)  is  manifestly 
one  illustration  of  his  first  use  of  language.  Perfect  and  vigorous 
from  the  start,  his  faculty  of  language,  as  a  native  law,  sponta- 
neously gave  names  to  the  objects  presented  to  his  gaze.  This 
exercise  seems  not  to  have  taken  place  until  after  he  had  held  in- 
tercourse with  God  (verses  16,  17),  but  the  whole  account  of  his 
creation  and  primitive  state  implies  that  his  power  of  speech,  and 
its  first  exercise,  were  among  the  mysterious  facts  of  his  supernat- 
ural origin. 

The  confusion  of  tongues,  narrated  in  the  eleventh  chapter  of 
Genesis,  may  be  an  important  factor  in  accounting  for  ^^^  confusion 
the  great  multitude  and  diversity  of  human  languages,  of  tongues  at 
The  plain  import  of  that  narrative  is,  that,  by  a  direct 
judgment-stroke  of  the  Almighty,  the  consciousness  of  men  became 
confused,  and  their  speech  discordant.  And  this  confusion  of 
speech  is  set  forth  as  the  occasion,  not  the  result,  of  their  being 
scattered  abroad  over  all  the  earth.  Whatever  language  had  been 
used  before  that  event,  it  probably  went  out  of  existence  then  or 
became  greatly  modified,  and  any  attempt  now  to  determine  abso- 


73  INTRODUCTION   TO 

lutely  the  original  language  of  mankind,  would  be  as  great  a  folly 
as  the  building  of  the  tower  of  Babel.' 

But  modern  philological  research  has  contributed  greatly  to  our 
knowledge  of  the  changes,  growth,  and  classification  of 
growth  of  new  the  languages  of  men.  We,  who  read  and  speak  the 
laiiKuages.  English  language  of  to-day,  know  that  it  is  very  differ- 
ent from  the  English  language  of  three  hundred  years  ago.  We 
go  back  to  the  time  of  Chaucer,  and  find  what  seems  almost  another 
language.  Go  back  to  the  Norman  Conquest,  and  it  requires  as 
much  study  to  understand  the  Anglo-Saxon  of  that  period  as  to 
understand  German  or  French.  The  reason  of  these  changes  is 
traceable  to  the  introduction  of  new  words,  new  customs,  and  new 
ideas  by  the  Noi-man  Conquest  and  the  stern  measures  of  William 
the  Conqueror.  A  new  civilization  was  introduced  by  him  into 
England,  and,  since  his  day,  constant  changes  have  been  going  on 
by  reason  of  commerce  with  other  peoples  and  the  manifold  re- 
searches and  pursuits  of  men.  New  inventions  have,  within  one 
hundred  years,  introduced  more  than  a  thousand  new  words  into 
our  language. 

Then,  also,  local  changes  occur,  and  the  common  people  of  one 
section  of  a  country  acquire  a  different  dialect  from  those  of  another 
section.  In  Great  Britain  different  dialects  distinguish  the  people 
of  different  localities,  and  yet  they  all  speak  English,  and  can  read- 
ily understand  one  another.  In  the  United  States  we  have  modes 
of  speech  peculiar  to  New  England,  others  peculiar  to  the  South, 
and  others  to  the  West.  But  think  of  a  community  or  colony  mi- 
grating to  a  distant  region  and  becoming  utterly  shut  off  from  their 
fathei'land.  New  scenes  and  pursuits  in  course  of  time  obliterate 
much  of  the  language  of  their  former  life.  Their  children  know 
little  or  nothing  of  the  old  country.  Each  new  generation  adds 
new  words  and  customs,  until  they  come  to  use  virtually  a  different 
language.  Many  old  words  will  be  retained,  but  thoy  are  pro- 
nounced differently,  and  are  combined  in  new  forms  of  expression, 
until  we  can  scarcely  trace  their  etymology.  Under  such  circum- 
stances it  would  require  but  a  few  generations  to  bring  into  exis- 
tence a  new  language.  The  English  language  has  more  than  eighty 
thousand  words;  but  Shakspeare  uses  only  fifteen  thousand,  and 
Milton  less  than  ten  thousand.  How  small  a  part  of  the  language, 
then,  would  be  necessary  to  a  band  of  unlearned  emigrants  settling 
in  a  new  country.     The  American   Indians  have  a  language  for 

'  A  prevalent  opinion  among  Jews  and  Christians  has  been  that  the  original  lan- 
guage was  Hebrew.  This  opinion  is  due  mainly  to  a  feeling  of  reverence  for  that  sa- 
cred tongue. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  73 

every  tribe,  and  with  no  literature,  or  schools,  or  civil  government, 
their  languages  are  constantly  changing,  and  in  some  places  with 
marvellous  rapidity. 

Thus  we  may  see  how  the  dispersion  and  separation  of  peojiles 
and  tribes  originate  new  languages.  "  If  the  tribes  of  men,"'  says 
Whitney,  "  are  of  different  parentage,  their  languages  could  not  be 
expected  to  be  more  unlike  than  they  are;  while,  on  the  other 
hand,  if  all  mankind  are  of  one  blood,  their  tongues  need  not  be 
more  alike  than  we  actually  find  them  to  be."  * 

From  our  own  nation  and  standpoint  we  take  a  hasty  glance 
back  over  the  history  of  some  five  thousand  years,  and  Families  of  lan- 
notice  some  of  the  great  families  of  languages  as  they  euages. 
have  been  traced  and  classified  by  modern  comparative  philology. 
Our  English  is  only  one  of  a  vast  group  of  tongues  which  bear 
unmistakable  marks  of  a  common  origin.  We  trace  it  back  to  the 
Anglo-Saxon  of  a  thousand  years  ago.  We  find  it  akin  to  the 
German,  Dutch,  Swedish,  Danish,  Icelandic,  Russian,  and  Polish, 
and  each  of  these,  like  the  English,  has  a  history  of  changes  pecul- 
iar to  itself.  All  these  form  but  one  family  of  languages,  and  all 
their  differences  are  to  be  explained  by  migration,  diversity  of  in- 
terests, habits,  customs,  pursuits,  natural  scenery,  climate,  religion, 
and  other  like  causes.  Manifestly,  all  these  nations  were  anciently 
one  people.  But  this  whole  group,  called  the  Germanic,  is  but  one 
branch  of  a  greater  and  more  extended  family.  The  Italian, 
French,  Spanish,  and  Portuguese  form  another  branch,  and  are 
easily  traced  back  to  the  Latin,  the  classic  language  of  indo-European 
the  old  Roman  Empire.  The  Greek,  again,  is  but  an  lamiiy. 
older  sister  of  the  Latin,  and  its  superior  literature,  its  wealth  of 
forms  and  harmony,  has  placed  it  first  among  the  so-called  "  learned 
tongues."  Passing  eastward  we  discover  many  traces  of  the  same 
family  likeness  in  the  Armenian,  the  Persian,  and  the  Zend,  and 
also  in  the  Pali,  the  Prakrit,  and  other  tongues  of  India.  All  these 
are  found  closely  related  to  the  ancient  Sanskrit,  the  language  of 
the  Vedas,  an  older  sister,  though  seeming  like  a  mother,  of  the 
rest.  All  these  languages  are  traceable  to  a  common  origin,  and 
form  one  great  family,  which  is  appropriately  called  the  Indo- 
European. 

Another  family,  less  marked  in  aflinity,  is  scattered  over  Northern 
and  Central  Europe  and  Asia,   and  contains   the  lan- 
guages of  the  Laplanders,  the  Finns,  the  Hungarians, 
and  the  Turks  in  Europe.     Scholars  differ  as  to  the  more  ajipro- 
priate  name  for  this  family,  calling  it  either  Scythian,  Turanian,  or 
'Language  and  the  Study  of  Language,  p.  394. 


74  INTRODUCTION   TO 

Altaic.  Still  different  from  these  are  the  languages  of  China  and 
Japan,  and  the  numberless  dialects  of  the  uncivilized  tribes  of 
America,  of  Africa,  and  of  the  islands  of  the  Pacific. 

Different  from  all  the  above,  and  forming  a  well-defined  and 
The  Semitic  closely  related  family,  is  that  known  as  the  Semitic,  so 
group.  called  from  Noah's  famous  son,  from  whom  the  Chaldee, 

the  Hebrew,  and  Arabian  races  are  believed  to  have  sprung.' 
Here  belong  the  Hebrew,  the  Punic  or  Phoenician,  the  Syriac  and 
Chaldee,  the  cuneiform  of  many  of  the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian 
monuments,  the  Arabic  and  the  Ethiopic.  These  languages,  as  a 
group,  are  remarkable  for  the  comparatively  large  number  of  stem- 
words,  or  roots,  common  to  them  all.  The  nations  which  used 
them  were  confined  in  geographical  territory  mainly  to  Western 
Asia,  spreading  from  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris  on  the  east  to  the 
Mediterranean  and  the  borders  of  Egypt  on  the  west.  Phoenician 
enterprise  and  commerce  carried  the  Punic  language  westward 
into  some  of  the  islands  of  the  Mediterranean,  and  along  the 
Carthaginian  coast :  and  the  Ethiopic  si)i*ead  into 
Egypt  and  Abyssmia.  ihe  Ethiopic,  or  (tccz,  is  an 
offshoot  of  the  Arabic,  and  is  closely  akin  to  the  Himyaritic  and 
the  Amharic,  which  latter  is  now  the  most  widely  spoken  dialect 
of  Abyssinia.      The  Arabic  is  still  a  livinfj  lansruaffe 

Aftibic  o  o       o 

spoken  by  millions  of    people   in  Western  Asia,  and 

contains  vast  libraries  of  poetry  and  philosophy,  history  and  fable, 

science  and  religion.     The  Phoenician  lanofuas-e  has  al- 

Punlc.  .  °     .  .  .  * 

most  entirely  perished,  a  few  inscriptions  and  frag- 
ments only  remaining.     The  cuneiform  inscriptions  of  the  Assyrian 

and  Babylonian  monuments  have,  in  recent  years,  been 

Assyrian.  .        .  j  ^ 

yielding  to  scholarly  research,  and  are  found  to  contain 
many  important  annals  and  proclamations  of  ancient  kings,  and 
also  works  of  science  and  of  art.  The  language  of  many  of  the 
monuments  is  found  to  be  Semitic,  and  its  further  decipherment 
and  study  will  doubtless  shed  much  light  upon  the  history  and 
civilization  of  the  ancient  empires  of  Nineveh  and  Babylon. 

The  Syriac  and  Chaldee  are  two  dialects  of  what  is  properly 
called  the  Aramaic  language.     This  language  prevailed  among  the 

'  The  name  Semitic  is  not  an  exact  designation,  for,  according  to  Genesis  x,  only  two 
of  Sliem's  sons,  Arpliaxad  and  Aram,  begat  nations  wiiicli  are  known  to  have  used  this 
speech,  while  three  of  his  sons,  Elam,  Asshur,  and  Lud,  were  the  progenitors  of  na- 
tions whicii,  peihaps,  used  other  languages.  On  tlie  other  hand,  two  of  the  sons  of 
Ham — Cush  and  Canaan — were  fathers  of  Semitic-speaking  peoples,  llupfeld  has 
proposed  the  name  "Hither-Asiatic,"  and  Kenan  "Syro-Arabic,"  but  these  names 
have  not  commanded  any  general  following,  and  the  name  Semitic  has  now  become 
so  fixed  in  usage  that  it  will,  probably,  not  be  displaced  by  any  other. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  75 

peoples  about  Damascus,  and  thence  eastward  as  far  as  Babylon, 
The  Chaldee  is  represented  in  several  chapters  of  the 

A.r3,rn2.ic 

Books  of  Ezra  and  Daniel,  and  also  in  the  Jewish  Tar- 
gums  or  paraphrases  of  the  Old  Testament.  It  prevailed  in  Baby- 
lon at  the  time  of  the  Jewish  exile,  and  was  there  appropriated  by 
the  Jewish  people,  with  whom  it  was  vernacular  in  Palestine  in  the 
time  of  our  Lord.  The  Samaritan  is  an  offshoot  of  this  language, 
though  mixed  with  many  foreign  elements.  The  Syriac  dialect 
appears  to  have  been  a  western  outgrowth  and  development  of  the 
Chaldee,  and  it  is  sometimes  called  the  western  Aramaic,  as  dis- 
tinguished from  the  eastern  Aramaic,  or  Chaldsean.  At  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Christian  era  it  prevailed  through  ail  the  region  north 
and  east  of  Palestine,  known  as  Syria  or  Aram,  and  its  existing 
literature  is  principally  Christian.  Its  oldest  monument  of  note  is 
the  Peshito  version  of  the  Scriptures,  which  is  usually  referred  to 
the  second  century;  but  its  most  flourishing  period  extended  from 
the  fourth  to  the  ninth  century.  It  is  still  the  sacred  language  of 
the  scattered  Christian  communities  of  Syria,  and  by  some  of  them 
is  still  spoken,  though  in  a  very  corrupt  form. 

Central  and  pre-eminent  among  all  these  Semitic  tongues  is  the 
ancient  Hebrew,  which  embodies  the  magnificent  liter- 

H6br6W» 

ature  of  one  of  the  oldest  and  most  important  nations 
of  the  earth.  The  great  father  of  this  nation  was  Abram,  who 
migrated  from  the  land  of  the  Chaldseans,  crossed  the  Euphrates, 
and  entered  Canaan  with  the  assurance  that  the  land  should  be 
given  to  him  and  his  posterity.  Hoav  closely  his  dialect  at  that 
time  resembled  the  language  of  the  Canaanites  we  have  no  means 
of  knowing,  but  that  he  and  his  family  abandoned  their  own  dia- 
lect, and  adopted  that  of  the  Canaanites,  is  in  the  highest  degree 
improbable.  The  Hebrews  and  the  Canaanites  appear  to  have 
used  substantially  the  same  dialect.  During  the  centuries  of  the 
Hebrews'  residence  in  Egypt,  and  the  forty  years  in  the  peninsula 
of  Sinai,  the  Hebrew  language  acquired  a  form  and  character 
which  thereafter  underwent  no  essential  change  until  after  the 
time  of  the  Babylonian  exile — a  period  of  more  than  a  thousand 
years.' 

Having  thus  glanced  over  the  scattered  nations  and  languages  of 
men,  we  are  enabled  to  mark  the  relative  national  and  Geographical 
historical   position    of    the    Hebrew  tongue.       Central   and   historical 

^  °  position  of  the 

among  the  great  nations  of  the  earth;  placed  in  the   Hebrew, 
midst  of   the  great   highway  of   intercourse  between  the  world- 
powers  of   the  East   and  the   West,  the  Hebrew  people  may  be 
'Coinp.  Gesenius,  Gescbichte  der  heb.  Spraclie  und  Schrift.    Lpz.,  1815. 


76  INTRODUCTION  TO 

shown  to  have  had,  in  many  ways,  a  providential  mission  to  all 
nations.  Having  traced  the  spread  and  outgrowth  of  the  principal 
families  of  languages,  and  noticed  the  principles  and  methods  by 
which  new  languages  and  dialects  are  formed,  we  are  prepared  to 
investigate  more  intelligently  the  special  character  and  genius  of 
the  so-called  sacred  tongues. 


■   *•¥   ' 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE   HEBREW  LANGUAGE. 


The  Hebrew  language  takes  its  name  from  the  Hebrew  nation, 
whose  immortal  literature  it  preserves.  The  word  first  appears  in 
Genesis  xiv,  13,  where  Abram  is  called  "the  Hebrew."  In  Gen. 
xxxix,  14,  17,  Joseph,  the  great-grandson  of  Abraham,  is  so  called, 
and  he  himself  speaks  (chap,  xl,  15)  of  Canaan  as  "the  land  of  the 
Hebrews.'"  Thenceforth  the  name  is  frequently  applied  to  the 
Derivation  of  (descendants  of  Jacob.  Two  different  derivations  of  the 
the  name  He-  name  have  been  proposed,  between  which  it  is  difficult 
'^^'^'  to  decide.     One  makes  it  an  appellative  noun  from  "I3y, 

beyond;  applied  to  Abram  because  he  came  from  beyond  the  Eu- 
phrates. Thus  the  name  would  follow  the  analogy  of  such  words 
as  Transylvania,  Transalpine,  Transatlantic.  But  such  a  designa- 
tion would  scarcely  be  applied  to  one  who  came  from  beyond  the 
river  i-ather  than  to  those  who  continued  beyond,  and  there  is  no 
evidence  that  the  Trans-Euphrateans  were  ever  so  designated. 
Nevertheless,  this  derivation  is  maintained  by  many  distinguished 
scholars,  and  there  is  no  insuperable  objection  to  it.  Another,  and, 
philologically,  more  natural  derivation,  is  that  which  makes  the 
word  a  patronymic  from  I3y,  £Jber,  the  great-grandson  of  Shera, 
and  ancestor  of  Abraham.  Thus  in  Gen.  xiv,  13,  where  the  name 
first  occurs,  Abram  is  called  '''73^^,  the  Eberite,  or  Hebrew,  in  con- 
trast with  Mamre,  '"ibxH,  the  Amorite.  This  is  in  thorough  anal- 
ogy with  the  regular  form  of  Hebrew  patronymics,  and  has  in  its 

'  "  Tiiis  name  is  never  in  Scripture  applied  to  the  Israelites  except  when  the  spealcer 
i?  a  foreigner  (Gen.  xxxix,  14,  17;  xli,  12;  Exod.  i,  15;  ii,  6;  1  Sam.  iv,  6,  9,  etc.), 
or  when  Israelites  speak  of  themselves  to  one  of  another  nation  (Gen.  xl,  16 ;  Exod. 
i,  19;  Jonah  i,  9,  etc.),  or  when  thej'  are  contrasted  with  other  peoples  (Gen.  xliii,  32; 
Exod.  i,  3,  7,  15;  Deut.  xv,  12;  1  Sam.  xiii,  3,  7)."  See  Kitto,  Cyc.  of  Bib.  Litera- 
ture, article  Hebrew. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  77 

favour  the  peculiar  statement  of  Gen.  x,  21,  that  Shem  was  the 
"father  of  all  the  sons  of  Eber."  This  manifestly  gives  to  Eber  a 
notable  prominence  among  the  descendants  of  Shem,  and  may,  for 
divers  reasons  now  unknown,  have  given  to  Abraham,  and  to  his 
descendants  through  Jacob,  the  name  of  Eberites,  or  Hebrews. 
Accordingly,  while  either  of  these  derivations  is  possible,  that 
which  makes  it  a  patronymic  from  Eber  seems  to  be  least  open  to 
objection,  and  best  supported  by  linguistic  usage  and  analogy.' 

The  Hebrew  language,  preserved  in  the  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, may  therefore  be  regarded  as  the  national  speech  of  the 
Eberites,  of  whom  the  descendants  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob 
became  the  most  distinguished  representatives.  In  the  later  times 
of  the  Hebrew  monarchy  it  was  called  Judaic  (D^l^n^,  2  Kings 
xviii,  26),  because  the  kingdom  of  Judah  had  then  become  the  great 
representative  of  the  Hebrew  race.  When  Abram,  the  Hebrew, 
(Gen.  xiv,  13)  entered  the  land  of  Canaan,  he  probably  found  his 
ancestral  language  already  spoken  there,  for  the  Canaanites  had 
migrated  thither  before  him  (Gen.  xii,  6).  It  is  notable  that  in  all 
the  intercourse  of  Abram,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  with  the  Canaanitish 
tribes,  no  allusion  is  ever  made  to  any  differences  in  their  language, 
and  the  proper  names  among  the  Canaanites  are  traceable  to  He- 
brew roots.  One  hundred  and  seventy  years  after  the  migration  of 
Abram,  his  grandson  Jacob  used  a  form  of  speech  different  from 
that  of  his  uncle  Laban  the  Syrian  (Gen.  xxxi,  47),  and  it  is  not 
improbable  that  Laban's  dialect  had  undergone  more  changes  than 
that  of  the  sons  of  Abram.' 

1  Is  it  not  possible  that  Eber  may  have  been  the  last  great  Semitic  patriarch  living 
at  the  time  of  the  confusion  of  tongues  (see  Gen.  x,  26),  and  that  he  and  his  family 
may  have  retained  more  nearly  than  any  others  the  primitive  language  of  mankind, 
and  transmitted  it  through  Peleg,  Reu,  Serug,  and  Nahor,  to  the  generations  of  Terah 
(comp.  Gen.  xi,  17-27)?  This  supposition  is  not  necessarily  invalidated  by  the  fact 
that  Aramaeans,  Cushites,  and  Canaanites  used  the  same  Semitic  speech,  for  these 
tribes  may,  at  an  early  date,  have  appropriated  the  language  of  the  Eberites. 

2  It  is  commonly  asserted  that  Abram  used  the  Chaldee  language  when  he  first  en- 
tered Canaan,  but  there  gradually  lost  its  use,  and  adopted  the  speech  of  his  heathen 
neighbours.  This  supposition,  however,  is  without  any  solid  foundation.  The  fact 
incidentally  mentioned  in  Gen.  xxxi,  47,  is  no  valid  evidence  in  the  case.  It  merely 
shows  that  Laban  and  Jacob  used  different  dialects,  and  leaves  the  question  entirely 
open  whether  it  were  Jacob's  or  Laban's  dialect  which  had  most  changed  subsequent- 
ly to  the  migration  from  Ur  of  the  Chaldees  (Gen.  xi,  31).  Abram's  separateness 
from  other  tribes  favours  the  idea  that  his  language  and  that  of  his  children  Isaac 
and  Jacob  would  be  less  likely  to  undergo  change  than  that  of  Laban,  whose  idolatrous 
use  of  Teraphim  (Gen.  xxxi,  19,  30)  indicates  in  him  a  cleaving  to  heathenish  prac- 
tices. The  language  of  the  Chaldees  at  the  period  of  Terah's  removal  may  have  re- 
sembled the  Hebrew  much  more  closely  than  the  later  Aramaic.     The  question  is  not 


78  INTRODUCTION   TO 

When  a  person  -with  whom  the  English  or  any  other  Indo-Euro- 
pean language  is  vernacular,  comes  for  the  first  time  to  investigate 

„  ,.  .^.  ,  Semitic  modes  of  speech,  he  finds  that  he  is  entering 
Peculiarities  of    ,  ^  '  *=> 

the  Hebrew  into  a  new  and  strange  world  of  thought.  In  some 
tongue.  thinsfs  he  meets  the  exact  reverse  of  all  with  which  he 

has  become  familiar  in  his  own  language.  The  written  page  reads 
from  right  to  left;  the  volume  from  the  end  toward  the  beginning; 
every  letter  is  a  consonant,  and  rej^resents  some  object  of  sense  cor- 
responding to  the  meaning  of  its  name. 

The  Hebrew  alphabet  consists  of  twenty-two  letters,  and  the 
written  characters  now  in  use,  commonly  called  the 
square  letters,  are  found  in  the  oldest  existing  manu- 
scripts of  the  Bible.  But  these  chai-acters  are  probably  not  older 
than  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era,  inasmuch  as  the  Asmonean 
coins  do  not  use  them,  but  employ  an  alphabet  closely  resembling 
that  of  the  Plur-nician  coins  and  inscriptions.'  The  oldest  monu- 
ments of  Hebrew  writing  are  some  coins  of  the  Maecabrean  prince 
Simon  (about  B.  C.  140),  a  number  of  gems  containing  names,  and 
probably  used  for  seals,  and  the  famous  inscription  of  Meslia,  king 
of  Moab  (about  B.  C.  900),  recently  discovered  among  the  ruins  of 
the  ancient  Dibon  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  The  names  of  the 
letters  are  all  significant,  and  their  original  form  was,  without 
doubt,  designed  to  resemble  the  object  denoted  by  the  name.  Thus 
the  name  of  the  first  letter,  aleph,  X,  means  an  ox,  and  it  is  believed 
that  some  resemblance  of  an  ox's  head  may  be  discerned  in  the  old 
Phoenician  form  of  this  letter  ( -^).  The  third  letter,  gimel,  J, 
means  a  camel,  and  in  its  ancient  Phoenician  \\  '\)  and  Ethiopic 
(*))  forms,  somewhat  resembles  the  head  and  neck  of  the  camel. 
According  to  Gesenius,  the  earliest  form  (-^)  represented  the 
camel's  hump.  The  name  of  the  letter  daleth,  n,  means  a  door,  and 
the  ancient  form  ^,  or  /\,  (Greek  A),  resembles  the  door  of  a  tent." 

whether  the  Canaanites  adopted  Abram's  languaj^e  after  his  migration,  as  Block  as- 
sumes (Introii,  vol.  i,  p.  GG),  but  whether  Abram  and  his  father's  house,  the  Eberites, 
may  not  have  spoken,  at  the  time  of  their  westward  migration,  substantially  the  same 
language  as  that  of  the  Canaanites.  How  long  the  Canaanites  had  boon  in  the  land 
before  Abram  came  is  uncertain  (comp.  Gen.  x,  18;  xii,  G),  but  perhaps  not  long 
enough  to  have  undergone  notable  changes  in  their  speech. 

'  Tlie  square  character  is  spoken  of  in  the  Talmud  as  the  Assyrian  writing,  and  i8 
said  to  have  been  brought  from  the  East  by  Ezra  when  he  returned  from  the  Baby- 
lonian exile;  but  this  tradition,  for  the  reasons  given  above,  is  not  entitleci  to  credit. 

"^  See  the  whole  alidiahct  similarly  oxhil)ited  in  Smith's  Diet,  of  the  Bible,  under 
article  Writing.  See  also  the  Ancient  Semitic  Alphabets  as  exhibited  in  Gesenius' 
Hebrew  Grammar,  and  the  Ancient  Alphabets  as  given  at  the  end  of  Webster's  Un- 
abridged Dictionary. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  79 

These  forms,  moreoA^er,  are  probably  abbreviations  and  modifica- 
tions of  still  more  ancient  ones,  which,  like  the  hieroglyphics  of 
Egypt,  were  real  pictures  or  outlines  of  visible  things/ 

Among  the  letters,  the  four  gutturals  X,  n,  n,  and  V  have  a  not- 
able prominence,  being  much  more  frequently  used  than 
other  letters.  Incapable  of  being  doubled,  they  greatly  Gutturals. 
affect  the  vowel  system,  and  the  first  two  (X  and  n)  represent 
scarcely  audible  breathings  in  the  throat,  and  are  frequently  alto- 
gether quiescent.  The  two  letters  wato  ("i,  commonly  called  vav) 
and  yodh  (■•)  are  also  frequently  quiescent,  and  may  be  called  the 
two  vowel  letters  of  the  ancient  Hebrew.  They  seem,  as  a  rule,  to 
have  been  employed  only  when  the  sounds  which  they  represent 
were  long.  With  the  exception  of  these  two  letters  the  ancient 
written  Hebrew  seems  to  have  had  no  vowel  signs.  The  same  com- 
bination  of  letters  might  signify  several  different  things,  according 
to  the  pronunciation  received.  The  indefiniteness  of  such  a  mode 
of  writing  compares  very  unfavourably  with  the  ample  supply  of 
vowel  letters  in  the  Indo-European  tongues,  and  nothing  but  a 
familiar  acquaintance  with  the  usage  of  the  language  as  a  living 
tongue  could  supply  this  defect.* 

The  Masoretic  system  of  vowel  signs,  or  points,  is  a  comparative- 
ly modern  invention,  prepared  to  meet  a  real  necessity  Masoretic  vow- 
when  the  Hebrew  had  ceased  to  be  a  living  language,  ei  system. 
"Of  the  date  of  this  punctuation  of  the  Old  Testament  text,"  ob- 
serves Gesenius,  "  we  have  no  historical  account ;  but  a  comparison 
of  historical  facts  wai'rants  the  conclusion  that  the  present  vowel 
system  was  not  completed  till  the  seventh  century  after  Christ;  and 
that  it  was  done  by  Jewish  scholars,  well  versed  in  the  language, 
who,  it  is  highly  probable,  copied  the  example  of  the  Syriac,  and 
perhaps  also  of  the  Arabic,  gi'ammarians.  This  vowel  system  has, 
probably,  for  its  basis  the  pronunciation  of  the  Jews  of  Palestine; 
and  its  consistency,  as  well  as  the  analogy  of  the  kindred  languages, 
furnishes  strong  proof  of  its  correctness,  at  least  as  a  whole.  We 
may,  however,  assume  that  it  exhibits  not  so  much  the  pronun- 
ciation of  common  life  as  the  formal  style,  which,  in  the  seventh 
century  after  Christ,  was  sanctioned  by  tradition  and  custom  in 
reading  the  Scriptures  in  the  schools  and  synagogues.  Its  authors 
laboured  with  great  care  to  represent  by  signs  the  minute  grada- 

•  Comp.  Bottcher,  Ausfiihrliches  Lehrbuch  der  hebraischen  Sprache,  vol.  i,  pp.  65,  66. 

*  "  A  Semitic  root,"  says  Bopp,  "  is  unpronounceable,  because,  in  giving  it  vowels, 
an  advance  is  made  to  a  special  grammatical  form,  and  it  then  no  longer  possesses 
the  simple  peculiarity  of  a  root  raised  above  all  grammar."  Comparative  Grammar, 
vol.  i,  p.  108 ;  Eng.  Trans.,  p.  98. 


80  INTRODUCTION   TO 

tions  of  the  vowel  sounds,  marking  even  half  vowels  and  help- 
ing sounds,  spontaneously  adopted  in  all  languages,  yet  seldom 
expressed  in  writing."  ' 

The  ancient  Hebrew  writing  being,  accordingly,  expressed  al- 
too-ether  by  consonants,  the  vowel  sounds  were  quite  subordinate 
to  them,  and  formed  no  conspicuous  element  of  the  language. 
"Words  and  names  are  exhibited  by  consonants,  to  which  alone 
sifniifications  may  be  traced,  but  relations  of  thought,  modifications 
of  the  sense  of  words,  and  grammatical  inflection,  were  denoted  by 
vowel  sounds. 

One  of  the  most  marked  features  of  the  language  is  the  tri- 
The  three-let-  literal  root  of  all  its  verbs.  This  peculiarity  is  a  fun- 
terroot.  damental    characteristic    of    all    the    Semitic    tongues. 

No  satisfactory  reason  for  its  existence,  or  account  of  its  origin, 
has  yet  been  produced,  though  a  vast  amount  of  study  and  research 
has  been  expended  on  the  subject.  Some  have  maintained  that 
this  triplicity  of  radical  consonants  is  the  result  of  a  philological 
and  historical  development.  Indications  of  this  are  found  in  mon- 
osyllabic nouns  (like  2S,  DwS',  Ui,  "in,  T),  and  verbs  which  double  one 
of  their  letters  (22^,  33D,  nnt^'),  and  also  in  those  verbs  in  which  one 
of  the  consonants  is  so  weak  and  servile  as  to  suggest  that,  origi- 
nally, it  was  no  radical  element  of  the  word  (pi  or  jn,  31t3,  HID). 
Hence  the  doctrine  of  a  primitive  system  of  two-letter  roots  has 
been  advanced  and  defended  with  great  learning  and  ingenuity. 
But  no  satisfactory  results  have  come  from  these  efforts,  and  the 
theory  of  two-letter  roots  has  not  obtained  a  general  following 
among  philologists.  Why  may  not  these  primitive  roots  of  the 
language  have  been  formed  of  three  letters  as  well  as  two  ?  The 
uniformity  and  universality  of  the  verbal  root  of  three  letters  argue 
that  this  is  an  original  and  fundamental  characteristic  of  Semitic 
speech. 

A  most  important  and  interesting  feature  of  the  language  is  the 
conjupations  manner  in  which  the  different  conjugations  or  voices  of 
of  the  verb.  ^j^g  verb  are  formed.  The  third  person  singular  of 
the  perfect  (or  past)  tense  is  the  ground  form  from  wliich  all 
model  changes  take  their  departure."  These  ckanges  consist  in 
varying  the  vowels,  doubling  the  middle  letter  of  the  root,  and 
adding  certain  formative  letters  or  syllables.  In  some  rare  forms 
there  is  a  repetition  or  reduplication  of  one  or  two  of  the  radical 

•  Davies'  Gesenius'  Hebrew  Graminar  (Mitchell's  Edition),  pp.  32,  33.   Andover,  1880. 
The  simple  participial  form  ^to'p,  or  the  imperative  ^bf?,  may  perhaps  present 
equal  claim  to  be  the  basal  form  of  the  Hebrew  verb.     Cornp.  Weir,  iu  Kitto's  Journal 
of  Sacred  Literature  for  Oct.,  1849,  pp.  309,  310. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  81 

consonants.  Since  the  time  of  the  great  Hebraist  Danz  (about 
A.D.  1 700)  the  verb  ^Dp,  hatal,  has  been  used  as  a  grammatical 
paradigm  to  illustrate  the  various  conjugations  of  the  Hebrew 
verb,  and  though  grammarians  have  differed  somewhat  in  the 
number  and  arrangement  of  the  conjugations^  common  usage 
adheres  to  the  following  general  outline: 

Simple. 
Kal/  f'Pi?,       Katal,        he  killed. 

Niphal,     ^Dpj,     mUal,      he  was  killed. 

Intensive. 
Piel,  PtSip,       Kittel,        he  massacred. 

Pual,         7tDp,       Kuttal,      he  was  massacred. 

Causative. 
Hiphil,      ^^npn,   Hiktil,       he  caused  to  kill. 
Hophal,    fjDpn,     Hoktal,      he  was  caused  to  kill. 

Reflexive. 

Hithpael,  ?t|)pnn,  Hithkattel,  he  killed  himself. 

From  the  above  it  will  be  noticed  that  the  simple,  the  intensive 
and  the  causative  forms  have  each  a  corresponding  passive.  The 
reflexive,  from  its  very  nature,  would  not  be  expected  to  have  a 
corresponding  passive,  and  yet  a  few  rare  instances  occur  of  a 
Hothpaal  or  Huthpaal  form  (nx^tsn,  to  be  made  unclean,  Deut. 
xxiv,  4;  nxnn,  to  be  smeared  over  loithfat,  Isa.  xxxiv,  6).  It  should 
be  noticed  in  the  paradigm  how  the  idea  of  activity  seems  to  attach 
to  the  a  sound,  while  the  e,  o,  and  ic  sounds  are  used  in  forms  which 
express  passiveness.  The  doubling  of  roots  expresses  intensity, 
and  the  prefixing  of  letters  denotes  some  form  of  reflexive  action. 

'The  origin  of  the  terms  Kal,  Niphal,  Piel,  etc.,  is  thus  stated  by  Nordheimer: 
"The  first  investigators  of  the  language,  wh.o  were  Jews,  wrote  in  Hebrew,  and  ac- 
cordingly employed  Hebrew  expressions  for  the  designation  of  grammatical  phenom- 
ena. To  denote  the  first  or  simple  species  they  used  the  word  pp,  Kal,  light,  simple  ; 
a  term  which  modern  grammarians  have  found  it  convenient  to  retain.  And  to  rep- 
resent the  remaining  species  they  took  the  modifications  of  the  verb  ^ys,  to  do,  to 

—     T 

make,  which  itself  supplies  the  name  for  this  part  of  speech.  Thus,  instead  of  a 
term  derived  from  the  signification  of  that  form  of  the  verb  which  receives  the  prefi.x 
J,  such  as  the  word  passive,  they  employed,  as  a  sort  of  grammatical  formula,  the  cor- 
responding modification  of  the  verb  ^;y2,  which  is  ^p£)j,  Niphal,  and  so  on  of  the 

rest." — Critical  Grammar  of  the  Hebrew  Language,  vol.  i,  p.  97. 
6 


83  INTRODUCTION  TO 

But  it  must  not  be  understood  that  there  are  always  exact  corre- 
spondence and  uniformity  in  the  significations  of  these  several 
Import  of  the  forms.  The  Niplial  is  very  generally  the  passive  of 
conjugations.  'Kal,  and  the  older  Hel)re\v  grammarians  were  wont  to 
regard  it  as  strictly  so;  but,  like  the  Greek  middle  voice,  it  is  used 
also  to  express  reflexive  and  reciprocal  action.  So  also  the  Piel  con- 
jugation is  used  to  express  not  only  intensity  of  action,  but  repeti- 
tion and  frequency,  and  sometimes  it  has  a  causative  signification. 
There  are  also  other  forms,  so  rare  and  exceptional  as  not  to  be 
classed  along  with  the  conjugations  of  the  usual  paradigm,  but 
which  represent  peculiar  shades  of  meaning  not  otherwise  ex- 
pressible. Such  forms  are  the  so-called  Pilel  (^^tpi?),  Pealal  (^P^i^pp), 
Tiphel  (i'tj?!?^),  and  other  forms  peculiar  to  certain  irregular  verbs. 
In  the  Arabic  language  there  are  fifteen  such  different  conjuga- 
tions of  the  verb,  though  in  that  language,  as  in  the  Hebrew,  no 
one  verb  is  used  in  all  its  possible  forms. 

The  tense-system  of  the  HebrcAv  verb  is  very  unlike  that  of  the 
Indo-European  languages.     Some  scholars  have  gone  so 

Tenses  or  tune-  i  o      o  o 

rorms  of  the  far  as  to  deny  that  the  Hebrew  language  has  any  ver- 
He  lew  verb.  -^^^  forms  which  can  properly  be  designated  tenses. 
Sir  W.  Martin  observes  that  the  forms  of  the  Hebrew  verb  com- 
monly called  preterite  and  future,  or  perfect  and  imperfect,  "  are 
not  tenses  in  the  proper  sense;  i.  e.,  the  notion  of  time  as  past, 
present,  or  future,  is  not  inherent  in  the  form.  They  note  only 
actions  or  conditions,  and  the  persons  of  whom  such  actions  or 
conditions  are  predicated.  They  predicate  a  certain  state  of  a  cer- 
taiii  subject,  and  no  more.  The  time  to  which  the  action  or  condi- 
tion, expressed  by  the  form,  belongs  in  each  case,  is  to  be  gathered 
from  the  context.  The  present  time  is  understood  if  none  other  is 
suggested  by  the  context.  The  difference  between  the  two  forms 
is  not,  then,  any  dift'erence  in  time,  but  a  difference  in  the  way  of 
conceiving  the  action  or  condition.  The  forms  then  may  be  accu- 
rately described  as  moods  indicating  modes  of  thought  rather  than 
as  tenses.  These  moods,  taken  in  connexion  with  indications  of 
time  supplied  by  the  context,  and  so  having  their  generality  lim- 
ited and  restricted,  become  equivalent  to  our  tenses.  Viewed  as 
moods,  they  differ  from  each  other  much  in  the  same  way  as  he- 
coming  from  being,  as  motion  from  rest,  as  progress  from  comple- 
tion.'''' '  Similarly  Wright  remarks  concerning  the  tenses  of  the 
Arabic  verb:  "The  temporal  forms  of  the  Arabic  verb  are  but  two 
in  number,  the  one  expressing  a  finished  act,  one  that  is  done  and 

'Inquiries  concerning  the  Structure  of  the   Semitic  Languages.      Part  i,  p.   11 
London,  1876. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  83 

completed  in  relation  to  other  acts  (the  perfect);  the  other  an  un- 
finislied  act,  one  that  is  jiist  commencing  or  in  progress  (the  imper- 
fect)." He  adds:  "We  have  discarded  the  names  Preterite  and 
Future,  by  Avhich  these  forms  are  still  often  designated,  especially 
in  our  Hebrew  and  Syriac  grammars,  because  they  do  not  accu- 
rately corresi^ond  to  the  ideas  inherent  in  them.  A  Semitic  per- 
fect or  imperfect  has,  in  and  of  itself,  no  reference  to  the  tem- 
jDoral  relations  of  the  speaker  (thinker  or  writer),  and  of  other 
actions  which  are  broxaght  into  juxtaposition  with  it.  It  is  pre- 
cisely these  relations  which  determine  in  what  sphere  of  time 
(past,  present,  or  future)  a  Semitic  perfect  or  imperfect  lies,  and 
by  which  of  our  tenses  it  is  to  be  expressed."  ' 

The  Indo-European  tongues  have  distinct  verbal  forms  to  express 
an  action  of  the  past  as  either  continuing  (imperfect,   _  ,. 

,  ,       ^  .  Unlike     Indo- 

as,  Iioas  toriting),  or  completed  definitely  (pluperfect,  European  tense 
I  had  written),  or  indefinitely  (aorist,  I  torote).  They  ^°''"^^- 
also  have  forms  for  expressing  action  as  continuing  in  the  present 
(as  I  am  loritmg),  and  as  completed  in  the  present  (perfect,  I  have 
written),  and  other  forms  for  exj^ressing  future  action  in  a  like  two- 
fold way  {I  xoill  write,  and  I  will  have  written).  Eut  the  less  sys- 
tematic and  more  emotional  Semitic  mind  seems  to  have  conceived 
the  temporal  relations  of  subject  and  predicate  in  a  somewhat  ideal 
way.  In  whatever  position  or  point  of  view  a  si^eaker  or  writer 
took  his  stand,  he  seems  to  have  viewed  all  things  as  having  some 
subjective  relation  to  that  standpoint.  Time  with  him  was  an 
ever-continuing  series  of  moments  (^''^j"),  loinJcs  of  the  eye).  The 
past  was  ever  running  into  the  future,  and. the  future  ever  losing 
itself  in  the  past.      The  future   tense-form  which  he   _    ,      ,    , 

i  Ideal  and  rela- 

used  may  have  actually  referred  to  events  of   the  re-  tive  past  and 
mote  iDast,  but  to  hifn  it  was  an  ideal  future,  taking  its    "  "'^*^' 
departure  from  some  anterior  event  either   expressed   or   under- 
stood."    It  is  a  characteristic  of  the  Hebrew  writers  to  throw  them- 
selves into  the  midst  of  the  scenes  or  events  which  they  describe, 

'Grammar  of  the  Arabic  Language,  from  the  German  of  Caspari,  vol.  i,  pp.  53.  54. 
Second  Edition,  London,  ISH.  Compare  the  similar  views  of  Ewald,  Ausfiihrliches 
Lehrbuch  der  heb.  Sprache,  §§  135,  136,  pp.  348-35S  (Gottingen,  1870),  and  Driver, 
On  the  Use  of  the  Tenses  in  Hebrew,  Oxford,  1874.  Ewald's  doctrine  of  the  He- 
brew Tenses  was  contioverted  by  Prof.  M.  Stuart  in  the  Biblical  Repository  for  .Jan., 
1838,  pp.  146-173,  and  Driver's  treatise  is  reviewed  by  A.  Miiller  in  the  Zeitschrift 
fiir  kith.  Theolcgie.     1877,  i,  p.  198. 

^  Murphy  suggests  that  the  two  tense-forms  of  the  Hebrew  verb  be  designated  re- 
spectively as  the  anterior  and  posterior.  See  his  article  on  the  Hebrew  Tenses,  in 
Kitto's  Journal  of  Sacred  Literature  for  Jan.,  1850  (pp.  194-202),  and  comp.  Weir 
on  the  same  subject  in  the  same  Journal  for  Oct.,  1849.     Weir  observes  (p.  317): 


84  INTRODUCTION  TO 

and  this  consideration  largely  accounts  for  the  subjective  and  ideal 
way  in  -svhich  the  two  tense-forms  (POj?  and  ?b\^\)  are  employed. 
Thus,  at  the  beginning  of  Genesis  (i,  1),  we  have  first  the  definite 
statement,  "  In  the  beginning  God  created  (^"^3)  the  heavens  and 
the  land."  This  statement  serves  as  a  headinor  to  the  narrative 
that  follows.  Having  taken  that  beginning  as  a  historical  stand- 
point, the  writer  next  describes  the  condition  of  things  at  that  be- 
giiming,  still  using  the  past  tense-form:  "And  the  land  was  (nri'n) 
waste  and  empty,  and  darkness  upon  the  face  of  the  deep,  and  the 
Spirit  of  God  brooding  (DSniJp,  feminine  participle,  kej^t  broodhuj) 
upon  the  face  of  the  waters."  Such  was  the  state  of  things  in  the 
midst  of  which  the  narrator  took  his  ideal  stand;  and  from  that 
starting  point  he  pi'oceeds  to  relate  the  succession  of  events.  His 
next  verb  is  in  the  future  or  imperfect  tense-form:  "And  God  will 
say.  Let  there  be  light;"  or  as  we  would  more  familiarly  say,  then 
says  God  (DTipX  l^N'}),  that  is,  God  then,  or  next,  proceeded  to  say, 
etc.  The  tense-thought  here  is  that  the  divine  fiat,  "  Let  there  be 
light,"  was  consequent  upon  the  period  and  condition  of  darkness 
which  was  upon  the  deep.  A  succession  of  thought  and  a  prog- 
ress of  time  are  thus  indicated,  a  mode  of  conception  peculiar  to 
the  Semitic  mind,  but  not  naturally  transferable  to  our  language. 

The  past  or  perfect  tense-form  is  also  used  when  speaking  of 
The  past  tense  things  to  be  Certainly  realized  in  the  future.  In  such 
form  for  fu-  cascs  the  event  of  the  future  is  conceived  as  somehow 
ceived  of  as  completed;  it  has  become  a  foregone  conclusion  and 
complete.  settled  purpose  of  the  Divine  mind.     Thus,  for  exam- 

ple, in  Gen.  xvii,  20:  "As  for  Ishmael,  I  have  heard  thee  (l"'J^Prv', 
this  hearing  was  actually  past);  behold,  I  have  blessed  him  ("'rip'ia), 
and  I  have  made  him  fruitful  ('nnsn),  and  I  have  multiplied  him 
(''ri*3"]n)  exceedingly."  All  this  was  to  be  realized  in  the  future, 
but  it  is  here  presented  to  the  mirid  as  something  already  finished. 
It  was  fixed  in  the  Divine  purpose,  and  from  an  ideal  standpoint 
in  the  future  it  was  viewed  as  something  past.  Then  it  is  immedi- 
ately added:  "  Twelve  princes  shall  he  beget  (Tpi"',  here  the  indefi- 
nite future  is  both  assumed  and  expressed),  and  I  have  given  him 
(vnnj)  for  a  great  nation."     This  last  verb  again  assumes  an  ideal 

"  The  Hebrew  writers,  instead  of  keeping  constantly  in  view  the  period  at  which 
they  wrote,  and  employing^  a  variety  of  tenses  to  describe  the  different  shades  of 
past,  present,  and  fiUnre  time,  accomplished  the  same  object  by  keeping  their  own 
times  quite  out  of  view,  and  regarding  as  their  present  the  period  not  at  which,  but 
of  which,  they  wrote."     He  accordingly  takes  the  7Dp  form  (commonly  called  past 

or  perfect)  to  denote  the  present,  not,  however,  excluding  the  idea  of  a  past  action 
or  condition  contiiuiitig  on  into  the  prc^^ent. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  85 

past,  a  something  seen  in  the  mind  as  complete  after  Ishmael  shall 
have  begotten  twelve  princes. 

The  past  and  future  import  of  the  two  tense-forms,  as  standing- 
opposed  to  each  other  in  the  indication  of  time,  is  apparent  in  such 

passages  as,  "  Before  them  there  have  been   (riM)  no 

T    °  ,  ,„  Vtt/  The  two  tenses 

such  locusts  as  they,  and  after  them  there  shall  not  be  have  a  past  and 
(n:^:)  such"  (Exod.  X,  14).  "As  I  was  On^^^)  with  *"t"^e import. 
Moses,  I  will  be  {^:;^ii)  with  thee"  (Josh,  i,  5).  "Yea,  I  have 
spoken  (W3"i),  also  I  will  bring  to  pass  (n3N''3N);  I  have  formed  a 
purpose  i'^'pl),  also  I  will  perform  it  "  (Isa.  xlvi,  11).  But  in  view 
of  the  fact,  set  forth  by  the  best  grammarians,  that  the  past  tense 
is  used  for  the  perfect,  the  pluperfect,  the  present,  and  the  future, 
and  the  future  tense  is  used  for  the  present  and  the  past,*  these 
different  tense-forms  of  the  Hebrew  language  are  to  be  understood, 
not  as  corresponding  to  the  more  fully  developed  tense-system  of 
Indo-European  tongues,  but  as  exhibiting  a  peculiarity  of  the  Sem- 
itic mind,  which  was  wont  to  view  the  temporal  relation  of  events 
in  the  vivid  ideal  way  explained  above.  Both  the  past  and  future 
forms  of  the  verb  are  often  best  translated  into  English  by  the 
present  tense.  The  past  form  often  indicates  a  past  action  which 
is  conceived  of  as  continuing  into  the  present,  and  having  become 
habitual.  "  The  ox  knows  (yT)  his  owner,  and  the  ass  the  crib  of 
his  master  "  (Isa.  i,  3).  Observe  also,  in  Psa.  i,  1 :  "  Happy  the  man 
who  walks  not  ('i]b[)  NP,  has  ceased  from  walking)  in  the  counsel  of 
wicked  ones,  and  in  the  way  of  sinners  does  not  stand,  and  in  the 
Beat  of  scorners  does  not  sit."  Here  it  is  not  difficult  to  apprehend, 
in  the  tense-form  used,  an  ideal  of  the  past,  but  it  is  scarcely  prac- 
ticable, except  by  undesirable  circumlocution,  to  transfer  the  con- 
ception into  simple  idiomatic  English.  The  future  form  is  often 
used  to  express  the  vivid  Semitic  conception  of  a  past  act-ion,  or 
series  of  actions,  as  continuing,  or  as  succeeding  one  another. 
Thus,  in  1  Sam.  xxvi,  17,  18,  we  may  express  the  Hebrew  futures 
by  the  English  present:  "And  Saul  knows  the  voice  of  David, 
and  he  says.  Is  this  thy  voice,  my  son  David  ?  And  says  David, 
My  voice,  my  lord,  O  king.  And  he  says.  Why  is  this — my  lord 
pursuing  after  his  servant  ?  " 

In  the    inflexion  ^  of  Hebrew  nouns  there  is  no  neuter  gender, 

'  See  Gesenius,  Heb.  Gram.,  §§  126,  127,  and  Nordheimer,  Crit.  Gram,  of  the  He* 
brew  Language,  vol.  ii,  pp.  161-174. 

'  "  A  regular  inflexion  of  the  noun  by  cases  does  not  exist  in  Hebrew.  .  .  .  The 
connexion  of  the  noun  with  the  feminine,  with  the  dual  and  plural  terminations,  with 
suffixes,  and  with  another  noun  foUpwing  in  the  genitive,  produces  numberless  changes 
in  its  form,  which  is  all  that  is  meant  by  the  inflexion  of  nouns  in  Hebrew.     Even 


86  INTRODUCTION  TO 

All  objects  of  nature,  inaiiiinate  things,  and  abstract  ideas  are  viewed 
The  gender  of  ^^  instinct  with  life,  and  spoken  of  as  either  masculine 
nouns.  or   feminine.      Mountains,    rivers,   seas,    being   objects 

of  majesty  and  representing  strength,  are  usually  masculine.  And 
they  are  often  pictured  before  the  fancy  as  consciously  exulting 
and  moving  with  exuberance  of  life.  Thus  the  mountains  watch 
with  a  jealous  e)''e  (nvi,  Psa.  Ixviii,  16),  they  rejoice  together  (Psa. 
xcviii,  8),  and  break  forth  into  song  (Isa.  xliv,  23),  and  even  leap 
and  dance  like  rams  (Psa.  cxiv,  4,  6).  The  rushing  torrents  lift  up 
their  voice  and  clap  their  hands  (Psa.  xciii,  3;  xcviii,  8),  and  the 
sea  beholds,  and  flies  (Psa.  cxiv,  3).  The  words  for  city,  land,  lo- 
cality, and  the  like,  are  feminine,  being  thought  of  as  mothers  of 
those  who  dwell  therein.  The  smaller  and  dependent  towns  were 
called  daughters  of  the  principal  city  (Num.  xxi,  25;  Josh,  xvii,  11). 
The  names  of  things  without  life  are  generally  feminine,  probably 
from  being  regarded  as  weak  and  helpless.  Abstract  ideas  are  also 
usually  represented  as  feminine.  We  are  not  able  to  understand, 
in  all  instances,  why  this  or  that  word  came  to  be  used  in  its  par- 
ticular gender,  but  this  whole  habit  of  thought  and  language  had 
its  origin  in  an  intense  lively  intuition  of  nature. 

The  use  of  the  plural  number  in  Hebrew  seems  often  to  denote 
Use  of  the  "ot  SO  much  a  plurality  of  individuals  as  fulness,  vast- 
piurai.  ness,  majesty,  or  completeness  of  endowments.     Thus 

the  first  word  of  the  first  Psalm,  which  we  commonly  render  as  an 
adjective — "  Blessed  is  the  man,"  etc. — is  a  noun  in  the  plural  num- 
ber (^|it^^?) ;  literally,  the  blessednesses  of  the  man.  We  bring  out  its 
real  force  when  we  take  it  as  an  exclamation:  0  the  blessednesses  of 
the  man,  etc.!  The  idea  may  be  either  the  manifoldness  and  multi- 
plicity of  blessedness,  or  the  completeness  and  greatness  of  blessed- 
ness. The  word  for  life  is  often  plural,  as  in  Gen.  ii,  V,  "  breathed 
into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  lives "  (D"".n) ;  verse  9  has  "  tree  of 
lives"  and  chap,  vii,  22,  "breath  of  the  spirit  of  lives.''''  Here  the 
meaning  cannot  be,  as  some  have  suggested,  twofold  life — animal 
and  spiritual,  for  the  plural  is  used  alike  of  the  life  of  tree,  animal, 
and  man.  It  seems  rather  to  denote  fulness  and  completeness  of 
life.  So  the  words  for  water  (d;'0)  and  heaven  (D'Pv'O  ^^'^  always 
used  in  the  plural,  probably  from  the  idea  of  vastness  or  majesty. 
This  is  also  the  best  explanation  of  the  plural  form  of  the  name  of 
God  (QVi^K) ;  what  the  old  grammarians  called  the  plural  of  excel- 
lency, expressing  the  dignity  and  manifold  power  of  the  Creator  of 
all  things. 

for  the  comparative  and  superlative,  the  Hebrew  has  no  appropriate  forms,  and  these 
relations  must  be  expressed  by  circumlocution."     tSesenius,  Ileb.  Grammar,  §  '70,  2. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  87 

The  foregoing  statement  of  the  philological  and  grammatical 
peculiarities  of   the   Hebrew  lanauaoe  may  sei've  to   ,  , 

^  .      .  .  ...  Hebrew  a  prmi- 

show  that  it  is  a  most  ancient  and  primitive  type  of  itive  type  of  in- 
human speech,  and  admirably  adapted  to  express  vivid  ™^°  speech. 
conceptions  and  strong  emotion.  Every  letter,  as  well  as  every 
word,  represents  some  visible  or  material  object,  and  the  studious 
observer  may  pass  among  its  written  monuments  as  through  a  pic- 
ture gallery,  and  feel  that  the  images  of  life  are  all  around  him. 

Keeping  in  mind  what  has  been  said,  we  proceed  to  show  the 
simplicity  of  structure,  and  the  emotional  expressiveness  of  this 
sacred  language,  and  its  consequent  fitness  to  embody  and  preserve 
the  ancient  oracles  of  God. 

Opening  almost  anywhere  in  the  narrative  portions  of  the  Old 
Testament,  we  find  abundant  evidence  of  the  simplicity  simplicity  of 
of  Hebrew  syntax.  The  sentences  are  ordinarily  short  structure. 
and  vividly  expressive.  The  so-called  compound  sentences  rarely 
involve  any  trouble  or  obscurity,  being  usually  only  two  or  more 
short  sentences,  whose  relation  to  each  other  is  most  direct  and 
simple.  There  are  no  involved  constructions  and  long-drawn  periods. 
The  first  chapter  of  Genesis  may  be  taken  as  a  specimen  of  prose 
narrative,  the  most  simple  and  natural  in  its  construction  of  any 
composition  known  to  literature.  Whatever  may  be  the  dilHcul- 
ties  in  its  exj)osition,  its  grammatical  structure  is  simple  and  in- 
telligible. The  following  verse  from  the  beginning  of  the  second 
chapter  of  2  Samuel  may  be  taken  as  a  very  fine  example  of  lively 
narrative : 

Aud  it  came  to  pass  after  this,  that  David  inquires  of  Jehovah,  saj'ing, 
Shall  I  go  up  into  one  of  the  cities  of  Judah?  Aud  says  Jehovah  to  him, 
Go  up.  Aud  says  David,  Whither  shall  I  go  up?  And  he  says,  To 
Hebron. 

Or  take  the  following,  from  1  Kings  xix,  19-21  : 
And  he  goes  from  there,  and  he  finds  Elisha,  the  son  of  Sliaphat,  aud  he 
ploughing,  twelve  yoke  before  liim,  and  he  with  the  twelfth:  and  Elijah 
passes  over  unto  him,  and  throws  his  mantle  unto  him.  And  he  leaves  the 
oxen,  and  he  runs  after  Elijah,  and  says,  I  will  kiss,  now,  my  father  and  my 
mother,  and  I  will  go  after  thee.  And  he  says  to  him.  Go,  Return,  for 
what  have  I  done  to  thee  ?  Aud  he  returns  from  after  him,  and  he  takes 
the  yoke  of  the  oxen  and  he  slaugliters  liim,  and  with  the  instruments  of 
the  oxen  he  boiled  them,  the  flesh ;  and  he  gives  to  the  people,  and  they 
eat,  aud  he  arises,  and  he  goes  after  Elijah,  and  he  serves  him. 

In  these  translations  we  have  used  the  present  tense  where  the 
Hebrew  has  the  future,  as  best  conveying  the  spirit  of  the  narra- 
tive.    The  writer  views  the  whole  scene,  and  depicts  the  several 


88  INTRODUCTION   TO 

parts  as  they  follow  one  after  the  other.  Those  several  acts  are 
relatively  future  from  the  jjoint  of  time  he  ideally  occupies,  and  his 
successive  sentences  are  short,  rapid,  and  life-like  in  their  arrange- 
ment. Hundreds  of  similar  specimens  might  be  adduced,  taken 
almost  at  random  from  the  Hebrew  scriptures. 

In  very  many  of  the  most  simple  sentences,  the  subject  and  pred- 
Omission  of  icate  are  placed  together  without  any  connective  par- 
copuia.  tide  or  copula.    Thus,  1  Kings  i,  1,  "  The  king  David  (was) 

old ;"  1  Kings  xviii,  21,  "  If  Jehovah  (be)  the  God ;"  Prov.  xx,  1,  "A 
mocker  (is)  wine  ;  raging  (is)  strong  drink."  This  omission  in  prose 
narrative  may  often  be  supplied  to  advantage  in  translation,  being 
required  by  the  idiom  of  another  language  to  complete  the  sense,  and 
maintain  grammatical  accuracy.  But  the  omission  gives  strength 
and  beauty  to  many  passages,  as,  for  instance,  the  following,  Psa. 
Ixvi,  3:  "How  fearful  thy  doings!"  The  attempt  of  the  Author- 
ized Version  to  supply  here  what  was  supposed  to  be  necessary 
greatly  weakens  the  sentiment :  "  How  terrible  art  thou  in  thy 
works."  So  again  in  Psa.  xc,  2,  "From  everlasting  to  everlasting 
thou,  God!"  Again,  in  verse  4,  "A  thousand  years  in  thy  eyes, 
as  yesterday."  It  may,  in  fact,  be  said  that  the  italic  words 
supplied  in  the  Authorized  Version  detract  from  the  force  and 
spirit  of  the  original  in  more  instances  than  they  supply  any  essen- 
tial need. 

In  the  order  of  words  in  a  sentence,  subject  or  predicate  may  be 
Order  of  sub-  P^^'^^^''^  ^Y&t,  accoj-ding  as  it  is  designed  to  give  emphasis 
ject  aad  predi-  to  the  one  or  the  other.  Very  frequently  the  sentence 
opens  with  a  verb,  and,  according  to  Gesenius,  every 
finite  verb  contains  in  all  cases  its  subject  already  in  itself  under 
the  form  of  a  personal  pronoun,  Avhich  is  necessarily  connected  with 
the  verbal  form.'  Thus,  Gen.  ii,  1,  "And  they  were  finished,  the 
heavens,  and  the  land,  and  all  their  host."  When  two  or  more 
verbs  are  construed  with  a  single  subject,  the  first  is  usually  placed 
before  the  noun,  and  the  others  follow,  as  so  many  distinct  state- 
ments. Thus,  Gen.  vii,  18,  "And  they  prevailed,  the  waters,  and 
they  increased  exceedingly  upon  the  land ;  and  she  went,  the  ark, 
upon  the  face  of  the  waters." 

In  the  Hebrew  language  there  is  a  comparative  lack  of  adjec- 
tives.     As  a  substitute,   nouns   expressive  of  qualitv, 

.      .    ,  1  ,        ^  .   .  p  /  Adjectives, 

material,  or  character,  are  used  as  genitives  after  the 

nouns  to  be  qualified.     Thus,  instead   of  golden  crown,  we  have 

croion  of  gold ;  instead  of  holy  mountain,  we  have  mountain  of 

holiness.     For  eloquent  man    (Exod.  iv,  10)  the  Hebrew  is  tnan  of 

'  Hebrew  Grammar,  §  144,  2. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  89 

words.  Tlie  knowing  or  intelligent  man  is  called  a  man  of  knowl- 
edge (Prov.  xxiv,  5).  This  Hebraic  usage  appears  often  in  the 
New  Testament  Greek.  In  accordance  with  this  usage  the  adjec- 
tives proper  almost  invariably  follow  the  nouns  which  they  qualify. 
Thus  a  toise  man,  the  great  river,  would  be  expressed  in  Hebrew, 
a  man  wise,  river  the  great.  The  primitive  conception,  lying  at  the 
basis  of  this  usage,  would  seem  to  be  that  of  an  additional  word 
designed  to  modify  the  one  just  uttered.  More  fully,  then,  the 
above  examples  would  be:  a  man — a  icise  one;  the  river — the  great 
one.  But  when  the  adjective  is  used  as  an  emphatic  predicate,  it 
usually  stands  first  in  the  sentence,  as,  "  Good  and  just  is  Jehovah  " 
(Psa.  XXV,  8). 

There  is  no  formal  comparison  of  adjectives  in  Hebrew.  The 
comparative  degree  is  indicated  by  a  use  of  the  prepo-  Methods  of 
sition  fro)n  (p)  prefixed  to  the  word  with  which  the  comparison, 
comparison  is  made.  Thus:  "The  serpent  was  crafty  from  every 
beast  of  the  field"  (Gen.  iii,  l);  that  is,  more  crafty;  his  cunning 
distinguished  him  from  other  beasts.  The  superlative  is  expressed 
by  means  of  the  article,  or  a  suffix,  or  some  2:)eculiar  form  of  ex- 
pression which  indicates  the  highest  degree.  Thus,  the  youngest 
is  tJie  little  one  (jbipri.  Gen.  xlii,  1-3).  The  most  abject  slave  is  a 
servant  of  serva^nts  (Gen.  ix,  25) ;  the  holiest  place  is  the  holy  of 
holies  ;  the  most  excellent  song  is  Ci'''l^Ci^'n  ~i''t?',  the  song  ofsongs.^ 

The  Hebrew  particles,  namely,  adverbs,  prepositions,  conjunc- 
tions,  and  interjections,  are  amons:  the  most  delicate 

Particles. 

and  interesting  parts  of  the  language.  In  order  to  a 
keen  and  discriminating  insight  into  the  spirit  and  bearing  of  nu- 
merous passages,  it  is  necessary  to  master  the  force  and  usage  of 
these  little  words.  Usually  the  grammars  and  lexicons  supply  all 
the  essential  information,  but  it  is  only  by  intimate  familiarity  with 
the  language  that  we  come  to  appreciate  their  delicate  and  vary- 
ing shades  of  meaning. 

'  Xordheimer  (Heb.  Grammar,  vol.  ii,  p.  60)  designates  as  "  the  absolute  superla- 
tive" those  striking  Hebraic  expressions  in  which  a  noun  is  construed  with  one  of 
the  divine  names.  Thus,  we  have  wrestlhigx  of  God  (Gen.  xxx,  8),  a  mountain  of 
God  (Psa.  Ixviii,  15),  mountains  of  God  {El,  Psa.  xxxvi,  6),  cedars  of  God  (Psa.  Ixxx, 
10),  trees  of  Jehovah  (civ,  16),  and  sleep  of  Jehovah  (1  Sam.  xxvi,  12).  But  these 
genitives  are  not  to  be  understood  as  designating,  adjectively,  a  degree  of  excellence 
or  of  intensity.  Rachel  would  vividly  portray  her  wrestlings  with  her  sister  Leah  as 
wrestlings  wliich  she  had  carried  on  witli  God  himself.  By  the  mountains  of  God  (or 
of  El)  the  psalmist  means  God's  mountains,  mountains  which  God  brought  forth  (comp. 
P.sa.  xc,  3).  So,  too,  the  cedars  of  God  and  the  trees  of  Jehovah  are  trees  which 
are  regarded  as  the  workmanship  of  God.  The  sleep  of  Jehovah  (1  Sam.  xxvi,  12) 
was  a  slumber  which  Jehovah  caused  to  fall  upon  Saul  and  his  attendants. 


90  ES'TRODUCTION  TO 


Hebrew  Poetry. 

Much  of  the  Old  Testament  is  composed  in  a  style  and  form  of 
^,.  ^  .       .   language  far  above  that  of   simple  prose.      The  his- 

Old  Testament  o»  rr  ^ 

largely  poeti-  torical  books  abound  in  spirited  addresses,  odes,  lyrics, 
^^^"  psalms,   and  fragments  of   song.     The  books  of  Job, 

Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  and  Song  of  Solomon,  are  highly 
poetical,  and  the  prophetical  books  (D''J'nnK  D''i<''3J,  later  2^'>'op/tetiS  of 
IlebreAv  Canon)  are  mainly  of  the  same  order.  Nearly  one  half  of 
the  Old  Testament  is  written  in  this  poetic  style.  But  the  poetry  of 
the  Hebrews  has  peculiarities  as  marked  and  distinct  from  that  of 
other  nations  as  the  language  itself  is  different  from  other  families 
of  languages.  Its  metre  is  not  that  of  syllables,  but  of  sentences 
and  sentiments.  Properly  speaking,  Hebrew  jDoetry  knows  nothing 
Not  metrical  ^^  metrical  feet  and  versification  analogous  to  the  poet- 
ic structure,  ical  forms  of  the  Indo-European  tongues.  The  learned 
and  ingenious  attempts  of  some  scholars  to  construct  a  system  of 
Hebrew  metres  are  now  generally  regarded  as  failures.  There  are 
discernible  an  elevated  style,  a  harmony  and  parallelism  of  sen- 
tences, a  sonorous  flow  of  graphic  words,  an  artificial  arrangement 
of  clauses,  repet^itions,  transpositions,  and  rhetorical  antitheses, 
which  are  the  inmost  life  of  poetry.  But  the  form  is  nowhere  that 
of  syllabic  metre.*  Some  scholars  have  supposed  that,  since  the 
Hebrew  became  a  dead  language,  the  ancient  pronunciation  is  so 
utterly  lost  that  it  is  therefore  impossible  now  to  discover  or  re- 
store its  ancient  metres.  But  this,  at  best,  is  a  doubtful  hypoth- 
esis, and  has  all  probabilities  against  it.  There  is  every  reason 
to  believe  that  the  Masoretie  pronunciation  now  in  use  is  in  the 
main  correct,  and  substantially  the  same  as  that  of  the  ancient 
Hebrews. 

'  On  the  subject  of  Hebrew  poetry,  see  Lowth,  Sacred  Poetry  of  the  Hebrews,  in 
Latin,  with  notes  of  Michaelis,  Rosenmuller,  and  others  (Oxford,  1828),  and  English 
Translation,  edited  by  Stowc  (Andovcr,  1820),  and  the  rrelimiiiary  Dissertation  to  his 
Isaiah;  Bellermann,  Versuch  iibor  die  Metrik  dor  IleljriLer  (Iknlin,  ISIT,);  Saalschutz, 
Form  der  hebraischen  Poesie  nebst  einer  Abhandlung  iiber  die  Musik  der  Hebraer 
(Konigsb.,  1825),  and  the  same  author's  Form  und  Gcist  der  hebraischen  Poesie 
(1853);  Ewald,  Die  poctischen  Biichor  des  altcn  Bundes,  vol.  i.  Translated  by  Nichol- 
son in  Kitto's  Journal  of  Sacred  Literature  for  Jan.  and  April,  1848;  Herder,  Spirit 
of  Hebrew  Poetry,  English  Translation,  in  two  vols.,  by  James  Marsh  (Burlington, 
Vt.,  IS.'JS);  L'inac  Taylor,  The  Spirit  of  Hebrew  Poetry  (Phila.,  1873);  De  Wettc,  In- 
troduction to  his  Coiiinioiitar  iiber  die  Psalnion,  pp.  32-().3.  Most  of  the  more  impor- 
tant works  upon  the  Psalms,  and  the  Biblical  Cyclopaedias,  contain  valuable  disserta- 
tions on  Hebrew  Poetry  and  Parallelism. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  91 

The  distinguishing  feature  of  Hebrew  poetry  is  now  generallv 
acknowledged  to  be  the  parallelism  of  members.     This 

111  ..ij-  r  11  ,..-,     Parallelism  the 

would  be  a  very  natural  form  lor  such  short  and  vivid  distinguishing 
sentences  as  characterize  Hebrew  syntax.  Let  the  soul  *^^'^'^^6- 
be  filled  with  deep  emotion;  let  burning  passions  move  the  heart, 
and  sparkle  in  the  eye,  and  speak  loudly  in  the  voice,  and  the  simple 
sentences  of  Hebrew  prose  would  spontaneously  take  poetic  form. 
In  illustration  of  this  we  may  instance  the  exciting  controversy  of 
Jacob  and  Laban  in  Gen,  xxxi.  The  whole  chapter  is  like  a  pas- 
sage from  an  ancient  epic;  but  when  we  read  the  speeches  of  Laban 
and  Jacob  we  seem  to  feel  the  wild  throbbings  of  their  human  pas- 
sions. The  sj)eeches  are  not  cast  in  the  artificial  harmony  of  par- 
allelism which  appears  in  the  poetical  books;  but  we  shall  best  ob- 
serve their  force  by  presenting  them  in  the  following  form.  After 
seven  days'  hot  pursuit,  Laban  overtakes  Jacob  in  Mount  Gilead, 
and  assails  him  thus: 

What  hast  tliou  done  ?  I 

And  thou  hast  stolen  my  heart, 

And  hast  carried  off  my  daughters 

As  captives  of  the  sword. 

Why  didst  thou  hide  thyself  to  flee? 

And  thou  hast  stolen  me, 

And  thou  didst  not  inform  me, 

And  I  would  have  sent  thee  away  with  joy, 

And  with  songs,  with  timbrel  and  with  harp. 

And  thou  didst  not  permit  me  to  kiss  my  sons  and  my  daughters! 

Now  hast  thou  played  the  fool — to  do! 

It  is  to  the  God  of  my  liand 

To  do  with  you  an  evil. 

But  the  God  of  your  father 

Yesternight  said  to  me,  saying: 

Guard  thyself  from  speaking  with  Jacob  from  good  to  evil. 

And  now,  going  thou  hast  gone ; 

For  longing  thou  hast  longed  for  the  house  of  thy  father. 

Why  hast  thou  stolen  my  gods  ?  Verses  26-30. 

After  the  goods  have  been  searched,  and  no  gods  found,  "  Jacob 
was  wroth,  and  chode  with  Laban,"  and  uttered  his  pent-up  emo- 
tion in  the  following  style: 

What  my  trespass. 

What  my  sin, 

Tliat  thou  hast  been  burning  afber  me? 

For  thou  hast  been  feeling  all  my  vessels; 

What  hast  thou  found  of  all  the  vessels  of  thy  house? 


92  INTRODUCTION  TO 

Place  here  — 

Before  my  brethren  and  thy  brethren, 

And  let  theu  decide  between  us  two. 

This  twenty  year  I  with  thee ; 

Thy  ewes  and  thy  goats  have  not  been  bereft, 

And  the  rams  of  thy  flock  have  I  not  eaten. 

The  torn  I  brought  not  to  thee ; 

I  atoned  for  it. 

Of  my  hand  didst  thou  demand  it, 

Stolen  by  day, 

Or  stolen  l)y  night. 

I  have  been  — 

In  the  day  heat  devoured  me, 

And  cold  in  the  night, 

And  my  sleep  fled  from  my  eyes. 

This  to  me  twenty  year  in  thy  house. 

I  served  thee  fourteen  year  for  two  of  thy  daughters, 

And  six  years  for  thy  flock  ; 

And  thou  hast  changed  my  wages  ten  parts. 

Unless  the  God  of  my  father, 

The  God  of  Abraham  and  the  fear  of  Isaac,  were  for  me,- 

That  now  empty  tliou  hadst  sent  me  away. 

The  affliction  and  tlie  labour  of  my  hands 

God  has  seen, 

And  he  was  judging  yesternight.  Verses  36-42. 


Tliis  may  not  be  poetry,  iu  the  strict  sense ;  but  it  is  certainly 
not  the  language  of  common  prose.  The  rapidity  of  movement, 
the  emotion,  tlie  broken  lines,  and  the  abrupt  transitions,  serve  to 
show  how  a  language  of  such  peculiar  structure  as  tlie  Hebrew 
might  early  and  naturally  develop  a  poetic  form,  whose  distinguish- 
in"-  feature  would  be  a  harmony  of  successive  sentences,  or  some 
artilicial  concord  or  contrast  of  different  sentiments,  rather  than 
syllabic  versification.  Untrammeled  by  metric  limitations,  the  He- 
brew poet  enjoyed  a  peculiar  freedom,  and  could  utter  the  moving 
sentiments  of  passion  in  a  great  variety  of  forms. 

We  cannot  too  strongly  emphasize  the  fact  that  some  structural 
Form  essential  ^01'"^  is  essential  to  all  poetry.  The  elements  of  poetry 
to  poetry.  are  invention,  inspiration,  and  expressive  form.     But 

all  possible  genius  for  invention,  and  all  the  inspiration  of  most 
fervent  passion,  would  go  for  nothing  without  some  suitable  mould 
in  which  to  set  them  forth.  When  the  creations  of  genius  and  in- 
spiration have  taken  a  monumental  form  in  language,  that  form 
becomes  an  essential  part  of  the  wdiole.  Hence  (he  impossibility 
of  translating  the  poetry  of  Homer,  or  Virgil,  or  David,  into  Eng- 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  93 

Hsh  prose,  or  the  prose  of  any  other  language,  i^nd  at  the  same  time 

preserving  the  power  and  spirit  of  the  original. 

Bayard  Taylor's  translation  of  Goethe's  Faust  is  a  masterpiece 

in  this,  that  it  is  a  remarkably  successful   attempt  to   „ 

'  •'  ^  Bayard  Taylor 

transfer  from  one  language  to  another  not  merely  the  on  form  in 
thoughts,  the  sentiment,  and  the  exact  meaning  of  the  ^°^^^^- 
author,  but  also  the  form  and  rhythm.  Mr.  Taylor  argues  very 
forcibly,  and  we  think  truly,  that  "  the  value  of  form  in  a  poetical 
work  is  the  first  question  to  be  considei'ed.  Poetry,"  he  observes, 
"  is  not  simply  a  fashion  of  expression ;  it  is  the  form  of  expression 
absolutely  required  by  a  certain  class  of  ideas.  Poetry,  indeed, 
may  be  distinguished  from  prose  by  the  single  circumstance  that  it 
is  the  utterance  of  whatever  in  man  cannot  be  perfectly  uttered  in 
any  other  than  a  rhythmical  form.  It  is  useless  to  say  that  the  naked 
meaning  is  independent  of  the  form.  On  the  contrary,  the  form 
contributes  essentially  to  the  fulness  of  the  meaning.  In  poetry 
which  endures  through  its  own  inherent  vitality,  there  is  no  forced 
union  of  these  two  elements.  They  are  as  intimately  blended,  and 
with  the  same  mysterious  beauty,  as  the  sexes  in  the  ancient  Her- 
maphroditus.  To  attempt  to  represent  jioetry  in  prose  is  very 
much  like  attempting  to  translate  music  into  speech."^ 

How  impossible  to  translate  perfectly  into  any  other  form  the 
following  passage  from  Milton : 

Now  storming  fury  rose, 
And  clamour  such  as  heard  in  Heaven  till  now 
Was  never;  arms  on  armour  clashing  brayed 
Horrible  discord,  and  the  maddening  wheels 
Of  brazen  cliariots  raged  ;  dire  was  the  noise 
Of  conflict;  overhead  tlie  dismal  hiss 
Of  fiery  darts  in  flaming  volleys  flew, 
And  flying  vaulted  either  host  with  fire. 
So  under  fiery  cope  together  rushed 
Both  battles  main,  with  ruinous  assault 
And  inextinguishable  rage.     All  Heaven 
Resounded,  and  had  earth  been  then,  all  earth 
Had  to  her  centre  shook.     What  wonder?  whea 
Millions  of  fierce  encountering  angels  fought 
On  either  side,  the  least  of  whom  could  wield 
These  elements,  and  arm  him  with  the  force 
Of  all  their  regions.^ 

The  very  form  of  this  passage,  as  it  stands  before  the  reader's 
eye,  contributes  not  a  little  to  the  emotions  produced  by  it  in  the 

'  Preface  to  Translation  of  Goethe's  Faust. 
«  Paradise  Lost,  Book  vi,  lines  207-223. 


94  INTRODUCTION  TO 

soul  of  a  man  of  taste.  Change  the  order  of  the  words,  or  attempt 
to  state  their  naked  meaning  in  prose,  and  the  very  ideas  will  seem 
to  vanish.  The  grandeur  and  beauty  of  the  passage  are  due  as 
much  to  the  rhythm,  the  emphatic  collocation  of  Avords,  the  express- 
iveness of  the  form  in  which  the  Avhole  is  placed  before  us,  as  to 
the  sublime  conceptions  they  embody.  But  if  so  much  is  due  to 
the  form  of  poetic  writing,  much  must  be  lost  from  any  noble  poem 
when  transferred  to  another  language  shorn  of  these  elements  of 
power.  The  least  we  can  do  is  to  make  prominent  in  our  transla- 
tions the  measured  forms  of  the  original.  So  far  as  it  may  be  done 
without  too  great  violence  to  the  idioms  of  our  own  tongue,  we 
should  preserve  the  same  order  of  words,  emphatic  forms  of  state- 
ment, and  abrupt  transitions.  In  these  respects  Hebrew  poetry  is 
Hebrew  spirit  pi'^^bably  more  capable  of  exact  translation  than  that  of 
and  form  may  anv  Other  lanccuasfe.  For  there  is  no  rhvme,  no  metric 
servedTnu-ans-  Scale,  to  be  translated.  Two  things  it  is  essential  to 
lation.  preserve — the  spirit  and  the  form,  and  both  of  these 

are  of  such  a  nature  as  to  make  it  possible  to  reproduce  them  to  a 
great  extent  in  almost  any  other  language,' 

'  Xo  man,  perhaps,  has  shown  a  greater  power  to  present  in  English  the  real^spirit 
of  Hebrew  poetry  than  Tayler  Lewis.  The  following  version  of  Job  iv,  12-21,  while 
not  exactly  following  the  Hebrew  collocation  of  the  words,  and  giving  to  some  words 
a  meaning  scarcely  sustained  by  Hebrew  usage,  does,  nevertheless,  bring  out  the  spirit 
and  force  of  the  original  in  a  most  impressive  way : 

To  me,  at  times,  there  steals  a  warning  word ; 

Mine  ear  its  whisper  seems  to  catch. 

In  troubled  thoughts  from  spectres  of  the  night, 

Wlieu  falls  on  men  the  vision-seeing  trance,— 

And  fear  has  come,  and  trembling  dread, 

And  made  my  every  bone  to  thrill  with  awe, — 

'Tis  then  before  me  stirs  a  breathing  form ; 

O'er  all  my  flesh  it  makes  the  hair  rise  up. 

It  stands;  no  face  distinct  can  I  discern; 

An  outline  is  before  mine  eyes ; 

Deep  silence !  then  a  voice  I  hear: 

Is  mortal  man  more  just  than  God  ? 

Is  boasting  man  more  pure  than  he  who  made  him  ? 

In  his  own  servants,  lo,  he  tnistetb  not, 

Even  on  his  angels  doth  he  charge  defect. 

Much  more  to  them  who  dwell  in  homes  of  clay, 

With  their  foundation  laid  in  dust. 

And  crumbled  like  the  moth 

From  morn  till  night  they're  stricken  down ; 

Without  regard  they  perish  utterly. 

Their  cord  of  life,  is  it  not  torn  away  ? 

They  die— still  lacking  wisdom. 

See  the  notes  on  this  rhythmical  version,  in  which  Lewis  defends  the  accuracy  of 
his  translation,  in  Lange's  Commentary  on  Job,  pp.  59,  60.  See  also  Lewis'  articles 
on  The  Emotional  Element  in  Hebrew  Translation,  in  the  Methodist  Quarterly  Review, 
for  Jan.,  1802,  Jan.  and  July,  ISOU,  and  Jan.,  1864. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  95 

While  the  spirit  and  emotionality  of  Hebrew  poetry  are  aue  to 
a  combination  of  various  elements,  the  parallelism  of  „,     ,     , , 

'  ^  structural  form 

sentences  is  a  most  marked  feature  of  its  outward  form,  of  Hebrew  par- 
This  it  becomes  us  now  to  exhibit  more  fully,  for  a  '^^'*^'i®"^- 
scientific  interpretation  of  the  poetical  portions  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment requires  that  the  parallelism  be  not  ignored.  Joseph  Addison 
Alexander,  indeed,  animadverts  upon  Bishop  Lowth's  "supposed 
discovery  of  rhythm  or  measure  in  the  Hebrew  prophets,"  and  con- 
demns his  theory  as  unsound  and  in  bad  taste.'  But  his  strictures 
seem  to  proceed  on  the  assumption  that  the  theory  of  parallelism 
involves  the  idea  of  metrical  versification  analogous  to  the  prosody 
of  other  languages.  Aside  from  such  an  assumption  they  have  no 
relevancy  or  force.  For  it  is  indisputable  that  the  large  portions 
of  the  Hebrew  scriptures,  commonly  regarded  as  jDoetical,  are  as 
capable  of  arrangement  in  well-defined  parallelisms  as  the  variety 
of  Greek  metres  are  capable  of  being  reduced  to  system  and  rules. 
The  short  and  vivid  sentences  which  we  have  seen  to  be  peculiar 
to  HebrcAv  speech,  would  lead,  by  a  very  natural  proc-  The  process  of 
ess,   to  the  formation  of  parallelisms  in  poetry.     The  f°"°i°s  Pf  f^i- 

'.  _ -I  .  .  lelisms  natural 

desire  to  present  a  subject  most  impressively  would  in  Hebrew. 
lead  to  repetition,  and  the  tautology  would  show  itself  in  slightly 
varying  forms  of  one  and  the  same  thought.     Thus  the  following, 
from  Prov.  i,  24-27: 

Because  I  have  called,  and  ye  refuse; 

I  have  stretched  out  my  hand,  and  no  one  attending; 

And  ye  refuse  all  my  counsel, 

And  my  correction  ye  have  not  desired ; 

Also  I  in  your  calamity  will  laugh ; 

I  will  mock  at  the  coming  of  your  terror; 

At  the  coming — as  a  roaring  tempest — of  your  terror; 

And  your  calamity  as  a  sweeping  whirlwind  shall  come  on; 

At  the  coming  upon  you  of  distress  and  anguish. 

Other  thoughts  would  be  more  forcibly  expressed  by  letting  tnem 
in  contrast  with  something  of  an  opposite  nature.  Hence  such 
parallelisms  as  the  following: 

They  have  kneeled  down  and  fallen; 

But  we  have  arisen  and  straightened  ourselves  up.  Psa.  xx,  9. 

The  memory  of  the  righteous  (is)  for  a  blessing, 

But  the  name  of  tlie  \vicked  shall  be  rotten. 

The  wise  of  heart  will  take  commands, 

But  a  prating  fool  shall  be  thrown  down.  Prov.  x,  7,  8. 

*  See  the  Introduction  to  his  Commentary  on  The  Earlier  Prophecies  of  Isaiah,  pp. 
48,  49.     New  York,  1846. 


96  INTRODUCTION   TO 

Such  simple  disticlis  would  readily  develop  into  more  complex  ex- 
amples of  j^arallelism,  and  ^ve  find  among  the  Hebrew  poems  a  great 
variety  of  forms  in  which  the  sacred  writers  sought  to  set  foith 
their  burning  thoughts.  The  more  common  and  regular  forms  of 
Hebrew  parallelism  are  classified  by  Lowth  under  three  general 
heads,  Avhich  he  denommates  Synonymous,  Antithetic,  and  Syn- 
thetic. These,  again,  may  be  subdivided,  according  as  the  lines 
form  simple  couplets  or  triplets,  or  have  measured  correspondence 
in  sentiment  and  length,  or  are  unequal,  and  broken  by  sudden  bursts 
of  passion,  or  by  some  impressive  refrain. 

1.  Synonymous  Pakallelism. 
Plere  we  place  passages  in  which  the  different  lines  or  members 
present  the  same  thought  in  a  slightly  altered  manner  of  expres- 
sion. To  this  class  belong  the  couplets  of  Prov.  i,  24-27  cited 
above,  where  it  will  be  seen  there  is  a  constant  repetition  of  thought 
under  a  variety  of  words.  Three  kinds  of  synonymous  parallels 
may  be  specified: 

a)  Identical,  when  the  different  members  are  comiDOsed  of  the 
same,  or  nearly  the  same,  words: 

Thou  wert  snared  in  the  sayings  of  thy  mouth ; 

Thou  wert  taken  in  tlie  sayings  of  tliy  mouth.   Prov.  vi,  2. 

They  lifted  up,  the  floods,  O  Jehovah; 

They  lifted  up,  the  floods,  their  voice; 

They  lift  up,  the  floods,  their  dashing.  Psa.  xciii,  3. 

It  shall  devour  the  parts  of  his  skin, 

It  shall  devour  his  parts,  the  first-born  of  death.  Job  xviii,  13. 

For  in  a  night  is  spoiled  Ar,  Moab,  cut  off. 

For  in  a  night  is  spoiled  Kir,  Moab,  cut  off.  Isa.  xv,  1 

b)  Similar,  when  the  sentiment  is  substantially  the  same,  but 
language  and  figures  are  different: 

For  he  on  seas  has  founded  it. 
And  on  floods  will  he  establish  it.  Psa.  xxiv,  2. 
Brays  the  wild  ass  over  the  tender  grass  ? 
Or  lows  the  ox  over  his  provender?  Job  vi,  5. 

c)  Inverted,  when  there  is  an  inversion  or  transposition  of  words 
or  sentences  so  as  to  change  the  order  of  thought: 

The  heavens  are  telling  the  glory  of  God, 

And  the  work  of  his  hands  declares  the  expanse.  Psa.  xix,  2. 

They  did  not  keep  the  covenant  of  God, 

And  in  his  law  they  refused  to  walk.  Psa.  Ixxviii,  10. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  97 

For  unto  me  is  he  lovingly  joined,  and  I  will  deliver  him; 
I  will  exalt  liim,  for  he  has  known  my  name.  Psa.  xci,  14. 

Strengthen  ye  the  weak  hands, 

And  the  feeble  knees  confirm.  Isa.  xxxv,  3. 

2.  Antithetic  PARAiiLELisM. 

Under  this  head  come  all  passages  in  which  there  is  a  contrast  or 
opposition  of  thought  presented  in  the  diflferent  sentences.  This 
kind  of  parallelism  abounds  in  the  Book  of  Proverbs  especially, 
for  it  is  peculiarly  adapted  to  express  maxims  of  proverbial  wis- 
dom.    There  are  two  forms  of  antithetic  parallelism: 

«)  Simple,  w4)en  the  contrast  is  presented  in  a  single  distich  of 
simple  sentences: 

Righteousness  will  exalt  a  nation. 

But  the  disgrace  of  peoples  is  sin.  Prov.  xiv,  84. 

The  tongue  of  wise  men  makes  knowledge  good, 
But  the  mouth  of  fools  pours  out  folly..  Prov..  xv,  3. 

For  a  moment  in  his  anger: 

Lifetimes  in  liis  favf)ur. 

In  the  evening  abideth  weeping; 

And  at  morning,  a  shout  of  joy.  PSa.  xxx,  5.  (6.) 

b)  Compound,  when  there  are  two  or  more  sentences  in  each 
member  of  the  antithesis: 

The  ox  has  known  his  owner. 

And  the  ass  the  crib  of  his  lord; 

Israel  has  not  known, — 

My  people  have  not  shown  themselves  discerning.  Isa.  i,  3. 

If  ye  be  willing,  and  have  heard, 

The  good  of  the  land  shall  ye  eat; 

But  if  ye  refuse,  and  have  rebelled, 

A  sword  shall  eat — 

For  the  mouth  of  Jehovah  has  spoken.  Isa.  i,  19,  20. 

In  a  little  moment  I  forsook  thee, 

But  in  great  mercies  I  will  gatlier  tliee. 

In  the  raging  of  wrath  I  hid  my  face  a  moment  from  thee ; 

But  with  everlasting  kindness  have  I  had  mercy  on  thee. 

Isa.  liv,  7,  8. 

3.  Synthetic  Parallelism. 

Synthetic  or  Constructive  Parallelism  consists,  according  to 
Lowth's  definition,  "only  in  the  similar  form  of  construction,  in 
which  word  does  not  answer  to  word,  and  sentence  to  sentence,  as 
equivalent  or  opposite;  but  there  is  a  correspondence  and  equality 


98  INTRODUCTION    TO 

between  different  propositions  in  respect  to  the  shape  and  turn  of 
the  whole  sentence  and  of  the  constructive  parts;  such  as  noun 
answering  to  noun,  verb  to  verb,  member  to  member,  negative  to 
negative,  interrogative  to  interrogative." '  Two  kinds  of  synthetic 
parallels  may  bo  noticed: 

a)  Correspondent,  when  there  is  a  designed  and  formal  corre- 
spondency between  related  sentences,  as  in  the  following  example 
from  Psa.  xxvii,  1,  where  the  first  line  corresponds  with  the  third, 
and  the  second  with  the  fourth : 

Jehovah,  my  light  and  my  salvation, 

Of  whom  shall  I  be  afraid? 
Jehovah,  fortress  of  my  life, 

Of  whom  shall  I  stand  in  terror? 

This  same  style  of  correspondence  is  noticeable  in  the  following 
compound  antithetic  parallelism: 

They  sliall  he  asliamed  and  blush  together, 

Wlio  are  rejoicing  in  my  harm; 
They  sliall  be  clothed  with  shame  and  disgrace, 

Who  magnify  themselves  over  me. 
They  shall  shout  and  rejoice, 

Who  delight  in  my  righteousness, 
And  they  shall  say  continually — be  magnified,  Jehovah, 

Who  delight  in  the  peace  of  his  servant.   Psa.  xxxv,  26,  27. 

h)  Cumulative,  Avhen  there  is  a  climax  of  sentiment  running 
through  the  successive  parallels,  or  when  there  is  a  constant  varia- 
tion of  words  and  thought  by  means  of  the  simple  accumulation 
of  images  or  ideas : 

Happy  the  man  wlio  has  not  walked  in  the  counsel  of  wicked  ones, 
And  in  the  way  of  sinners  has  not  stood, 
And  in  the  seat  of  scorners  has  not  sat  down; 

But  in  the  law  of  Jehovah  is  liis  deliglit; 

And  in  his  law  will  he  meditate  day  and  night.  Psa.  i,  1,  2. 

Seek  ye  Jehovali  while  lie  may  he  found, 

Call  upon  iiini  while  he  is  near  by; 

Let  the  wicked  forsake  his  way. 

And  the  man  of  iniquity  his  thoughts; 
And  let  him  return  to  Jehovah,  and  he  will  have  mercy  on  hira, 
And  to  our  tiod,  for  he  will  be  abundant  to  pardon.  Isa.  Iv,  6,  7. 

For  the  fig-tree  shall  not  blossom, 
And  no  produce  in  the  vines ; 
Deceived  has  the  work  of  the  olive, 
And  llulds  have  not  wrought  food; 

'  Lowth's  Isalali,  rreliniiiiary  Dissertation,  p.  21.     Lontlon,  1779. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  99 

Cut  off  from  the  fold  was  the  flock, 
And  no  cattle  in  the  stalls ; 

But  I — In  Jehovah  will  I  exult ; 
I  will  rejoice  in  the  God  of  my  salvation.   Hah.  iii,  17. 

But  aside  from  these  more  regular  forms  of  parallelisin,  there  are 
numerous  peculiarities  in  Hebrew  poetry  which  are  not  in-eguiar  struc- 
to  be  classified  under  any  rules  or  theories  of  prosody,  sioned^poeucai 
The  rapt  flights  of  the  ancient  bards  ignored  such  utterances. 
trammels,  and,  by  abrupt  turns  of  thought,  broken  and  unequal 
lines,  and  sudden  ejaculations  of  prayer  or  emotion,  they  produced 
a  great  variety  of  expressive  forms  of  sentiment.  Take,  for  illus- 
tration, the  two  following  extracts  from  Jacob's  dying  psalm — the 
blessings  of  Judah  and  Joseph — and  note  the  variety  of  expression, 
the  sharp  transitions,  the  profound  emotion,  and  the  boldness  and 
abundance  of  metaphor: 

Judah,  tliou!     Thy  brothers  shall  praise  thee; 

Thy  hand  in  the  neck  of  tliy  foes! 

They  shall  bow  down  to  thee,  the  sons  of  tliy  father. 

Whelp  of  a  lion  is  Judah. 
From  the  i^rey,  O  my  son,  thou  hast  gone  up! 

He  bent  low ; 

He  lay  down  as  a  lion, 

And  as  a  lioness ; 

Who  will  rouse  him  up? 
There  shall  not  dejjart  a  sceptre  from  Judah, 
And  a  ruler  from  between  his  feet, 
Until  he  shall  come — Shiloli  — 
And  to  him  shall  be  gathered  peoples. 
Fastening  to  the  vine  his  foal, 
And  to  tiie  choice  vine  the  son  of  his  ass, 
He  has  washed  in  the  wine  his  garment, 
And  in  the  blood  of  grapes  his  clothes. 
Dark  the  eyes  from  wine, 
And  white  the  teeth  from  milk.  Gen.  xlix,  8-13, 

Son  (if  a  fruit  tree  is  Joseph, 
Son  of  a  fruit  tree  over  a  fountain; 
Daughters  climbing  over  a  wall. 

And  they  imbittered  him, 

And  they  shot, 

And  they  hated  him, — ■ 

The  lords  of  the  bow. 
Yet  remained  in  strength  his  bow, 
And  firm  were  tlie  arms  of  his  hands, 
From  the  hands  of  the  Mighty  One  of  Jacob ; 
From  the  name  of  the  Shepherd,  the  Stone  of  Israel; 


100  INTRODUCTION   TO 

From  the  God  of  thy  father,  and  he  will  help  thee; 
And  the  Almighty,  and  he  will  bless  thee; 
Blessings  of  the  heavens  above, 
Blessings  of  the  deep  lying  down  l)elow, 
•  Blessings  of  breasts  and  womb. 

The  blessings  of  thy  father  have  been  mighty. 
Above  the  blessings  of  the  enduring  mountains, 
The  desire  of  the  everlasting  hills. 
Let  them  be  to  the  head  of  Joseph 
And  to  the  crown  of  the  devoted  of  his  brothers.  Gen.  xlix,  23-36. 

In  the  later  period  of  the  language  Ave  find  a  number  of  artificial 
Alphabetical  poems,  in  which  the  several  lines  or  verses  begin  with 
poems.  the   letters  of   the  Hebrew  al}>iiabet  in  their  regular 

order.  Thus,  in  Psalms  cxi  and  cxii,  the  lines  or  half  verses  are 
arranged  alphabetically.  In  Psalms  xxv,  xxxiv,  cxlv,  Prov.  xxxi, 
10-31,  and  Lam.  i  and  ii,  each  separate  verse  begins  with  a  new 
letter  in  regular  order.  In  Psa.  xxxvii,  Avith  some  slight  exceptions, 
every  alternate  verse  begins  with  a  new  letter.  In  Psa.  cxix  and 
Lam.  iii,  a  series  of  verses,  each  beginning  with  the  same  letter,  is 
grouped  into  strophes  or  stanzas,  and  the  strophes  follow  one  an- 
other in  alphabetical  order.  Such  artificiality  evinces  a  later  period 
in  the  life  of  the  language,  when  the  poetical  spirit,  becoming  less 
creative  and  more  mechanical,  contrives  a  new  feature  of  external 
form  to  arrest  attention  and  assist  the  memory. 

We  find  also  in  the  Old  Testament  several  noticeable  instances 

„  ^       ^  of    rhyme.     The   following,    in    Samson's    answer   to 

Hebrew  rhymes.      ,  "^  p  m- 

the  men  of  Timnath  (Judges  xiv,  18),  was  probably 

designed 


'G' 


•    T    •  V       T  : 

If  ye  had  not  plowed  -with  my  heifer, 
Ye  had  not  found  out  my  riddle. 

The  following  are  perhaps  only  accidental : 

^2'^t'l  nmp  D''\yi  &&-\_n  -a^JD 
iT-ip"-  -lac'K  H2D^  ay^  ^2br:> 

•  ':  -        I  :    V  T   :  t  ;         •• ;  - 

Kings  of  Tarshish  and  of  isles  a  gift  shall  return, 

Kings  of  Shel)a  and  Seba  a  present  shall  bring.  Psa.  Ixxii,  10. 

•  T  :   ■ 

•     T  T    -;  - 

As  Sodom  had  we  been, 

To  Gomonnh  had  we  been  like.  Isa.  i,  9. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  101 


^35VJ<  'rnay  n^bv) 

In  a  nation  profane  will  I  send  him, 

And  upon  a  peojDle  of  my  wrath  will  I  command  him.  Isa.  x,  6.' 

But  aside  from  all  artificial  forms,  the  Hebrew  language,  in  its 

words,  idiomatic  phrases,  vivid  concepts,  and  pictorial  „.  .^ 

'  ^  .,..',  Vividness      of 

power,  has  a  remarkable   smiplicity  and  beauty.     To   Hebrew  words 

the  emotional  Hebrew  every  thing  was  full  of  life,  and  ^•^•^  P^'^'^ses. 
the  manner  of  the  most  ordinary  action  attracted  his  attention. 
Sentences  full  of  pathos,  sublime  exclamations,  and  profound  sug- 
gestions often  found  expression  in  his  common  talk.  How  often 
the  word  behold  {''ip_r\)  occurs  in  simple  narrative!  How  the  very 
process  and  order  of  action  are  pictured  in  the  following  passages : 
"  Jacob  lifted  up  his  feet,  and  went  to  the  land  of  the  sons  of  the 
east"  (Gen.  xxix,  1).  "He  lifted  up  his  voice,  and  wept.  .  .  . 
Laban  heard  the  hearing  about  Jacob,  the  son  of  his  brother, 
and  he  ran  to  meet  him,  and  embraced  him,  and  kissed  him,  and 
brought  him  to  his  house"  (verses  11,  13).  "Jacob  lifted  up  his 
eyes,  and  looked,  and,  behold!  Esau  was  coming"  (Gen.  xxxiii,  l). 
How  intensely  vivid  the  picture  of  Sisera's  death,  wrought  by  the 
hand  of  Jael: 

Her  liaiid  to  tlie  tent-pin  she  sent  forth, 

And  her  riglit  hand  to  tlie  hammer  of  the  workmen; 

And  she  hammered  Sisera.  she  crushed  his  head; 

And  she  smote  through  and  transfixed  his  temples. 

Between  her  feet  he  sunk  down;  he  fell;  he  lay; 

Between  her  feet  he  sunk  down,  he  fell ; 

Wliere  he  sunk  down,  there  lie  fell  slain.  Judges  v,  36,  27. 

There  are,  again,  many  passages  where  a  notable  ellipsis  enhances 
the  impression:  "And  now,  lest  he  send  forth  his  hand, 
and  take  also  from  the  tree  of  life,  and  eat,  and  live 
forever — and  sent  him  forth  Jehovah  God  from  the  garden  of 
Eden  "  (Gen.  iii,  22).  "  And  now,  if  thou  wilt  forgive  their  sin — 
and  if  not,  wipe  me,  I  pray,  from  thy  book  which  thou  hast  writ- 
ten." "Return,  O  Jehovah— how  long!"  (Psa.  xc,  13.)  The  at- 
tempt of  our  translators  to  supply  the  ellipsis  in  Psa.  xix,  3,  4,  per- 
verts the  real  meaning:  "  There  is  no  speech  nor  language  ivhere 
their  voice  is  not  heard."  The  simple  Hebrew  is  much  more  im- 
pressive: 

'  Comp.  also  Isa.  i,  25,  where  three  rhymes  appear  in  one  verse;  and  Isa.  i,  2H  ; 
xliv,  3;  xlix,  10;  liii,  6;  Job  vi,  9;  Psa.  xlv,  8;  Trov.  vi,  1. 


103  INTRODUCTION   TO 

No  saying,  and  no  words; — 

Not  heard — their  voice ; 

In  all  the  land  -svent  forth  their  line, 

And  in  the  end  of  the  world  their  utterances. 


That  is,  the  heavens  have  no  audible  language  or  voice  such  as  mor- 
tal man  is  wont  to  speak;  nevertheless,  they  have  been  stretched 
as  a  measuring  line  over  all  the  surface  of  the  earth,  and,  though 
voiceless,  they  have  sermons  for  thoughtful  souls  in  every  part  of 
the  habitable  world. 

Such  elliptical  modes  of  expression  would  be  very  natural  in  a 

^   languao-e  which  has  no  vowels  in  its  alphabet.     A  writ- 
Hebrew  speech  &      »  -i 

naturally  eiiip-  ten  document,  containing  only  consonants,  and  capable 
^"^'^^"  of   a   variety   of   meanings    according   as   it  was  pro- 

nounced or  understood,  must  necessarily  leave  much  to  the  imagi- 
nation of  the  reader.  The  simple  but  emotional  speaker  will  often 
convey  his  meaning  as  much  by  signs,  gpstures,  and  peculiai*  into- 
nations of  voice,  as  by  his  words;  and  this  very  habit  of  leaving 
much  for  the  common  sense  and  imagination  of  the  reader  to  sup- 
ply seems  to  have  impressed  itself  upon  the  written  language  of 
the  sensitive  Hebrew.  He  took  it  for  granted  that  his  hearers 
and  readers  would  understand  much  that  he  did  not  literally 
say.  In  this,  however,  he  was  at  times  mistaken.  Like  Moses, 
when  he  smote  the  Egyptian,  "  he  supposed  that  his  bretliren  would 
understand  that  God  by  his  hand  would  give  deliverance  to  them; 
but  they  did  not  understand"  (Acts  vii,  25).  So  sacred  Avriters  of 
the  Old  Testament,  as  well  as  of  the  New,  left  on  record  things 
difficult  to  understand  (SvavorjTa,  2  Peter  iii,  16),  and  hence  the 
variety  of  meanings  attached  to  certain  parts  of  Scripture. 

In  direct  addresses  almost  every  object  of  nature,  and  even  ab- 
Eniofionaiityof  stract  ideas,  are  appealed  to  as  if  instinct  with  living 
direct  address,  consciousness:  "Spring  u]i,  O  well;  sing  ye  to  her" 
(Num.  xxi,  11).  "Sing,  O  heavens;  and  rejoice,  O  land;  break 
forth  the  mountains  into  song!"  (Isa.  xlix,  13).  "Awake,  awake, 
put  on  strength,  O  arm  of  Jehovah !  as  the  days  of  old,  the  gen- 
erations of  eternities"  (Isa.  li,  9).  "Awake,  awake,  put  on  thy 
strength,  O  Zion,  put  on  the  garments  of  thy  beauty,  O  Jerusalem, 
city  of  holiness!"  (Isa.  Hi,  1).  "Open,  O  Lebanon,  thy  doors,  and 
fire  shall  eat  into  thy  cedars!  Howl,  O  cypress,  for  the  cedar  has 
fallen,  which  mighty  ones  did  spoil !  Howl,  oaks  of  Bashan,  for 
down  has  gone  the  inaccessible  forest!"  (Zech.  xi,  1,2).  "O  sword, 
awake  against  my  friend ;  and  against  the  man  of  my  companion- 
ship ! "  (Zech.  xiii,  1). 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  103 

We  should  also  note  the   anthropomorphisms  and  anthropopa- 
thisms  of  the  Old  Testament.     They  are  hut  the  vivid   ^^^  Testament 
concepts  which  impressed  the  emotional  Hebrew  mind,   antiiropomor- 
and  are  in  perfect  keeping  with  the  spirit  of  the  language,   p^^™' 
What  an  affecting  conception  of  the  personal  God  in  Gen.  vi,  5,  6: 
"And  Jehovah  saw  that  great  was  the  wickedness  of  men  in  the 
land,  and  every  imagination  of  the  thoughts  of  his  heart — only  evil 
all  the  day.     And  it  repented  Jehovah  that  he  made  men  in  the 
land,  and  it  pained  him  to  his  heart."     Also  in  the  following:  "  And 
there  Avas  the  bow  in  the  cloud,  and  I  looked  at  it  to  remember  the 
covenant  eternal  between  God  and  every  living  soul  in  all  flesh, 
which  is  iipon  the  land"  (Gen.  ix,  16).     "Jehovah  went  down  to 
see  the  city  and  the  tower,  which  the  sons  of  men  were  building" 
(Gen.  xi,  5).     Moses'  song  (Exod.  xv)  extols  Jehovah  as  "  a  man  of 
war  "  (verse  3).     He  calls  the  strong  east  wind  (xiv,  2 J),  by  which 
the  Avaters  of  the  Red  Sea  were  heaped  up,  "  the  wind  of  thy  nose  " 
(verse  8),  using  thus  the  metaj)hor  of  an  enraged  animal  breathing 
fury  from  his  distended  nostrils.     In  Hezekiah's  prayer  (2  Kings 
xix,  16)  we  have  this  form  of  petition:  "Stretch  out,  O  Jehovah, 
thy  eai*,  and  hear;  open,  O  Jehovah,  thy  eyes,  and  see."     David 
says  (1  Chron.  xvii,  25):  "For  thou,  O  my  God,  didst  uncover  the 
ear  of  thy  servant — to  build  for  him  a  house;  therefore  found  thy 
servant  to  pray  to  thy  face."      Observe  the  suggestive  force  of 
the  words  here  used.     David  receives  the  revelation  of  God  from 
the  prophet  Nathan  as  a  confidential  communication;  as  if  a  bosom 
friend  had  stolen  up  to  him,  removed  the  locks  of  hair  that  covered 
his  ear,  and  whispered  there  a  secret  word  of  wondrous  promise 
which,  at  that  time,  no  one  else  might  hear.     Then  it  seemed  to 
the  enx-aptured  king  that  because  God  had  thus  found  him,  and  2m- 
covei'ed  Ms  ear,  therefore  he  had  come  to  find  how  to  pray  to  God's 
face.' 

We  have  already  seen  how  many  influences  combine,  in  the  his- 
tory of  a  language,  to  modify  and  change  its  forms  and  inti'o- 
duce  new  dialects,  which  may  again  be  developed  into  new  lan- 

'  "  Why  talk  of  anthropopathism,"  says  Tayler  Lewis,  "  as  if  there  were  some  spe- 
cial absurdity  covered  by  this  sounding  term,  when  any  revelation  conceivable  must 
be  anthropopathic?  If  made  subjectively — as  some  claim  it  should  be  made,  if  made 
at  all — that  is,  to  all  men  directly,  through  thouglits  and  feelings  inwardly  excited  in 
each  human  soul  without  any  use  of  language,  still  it  must  be  anthropopathic.  There 
is  no  escape  from  it.  Whatever  comes  in  this  way  to  man  must  take  the  measure  of 
man.  .  .  .  The  thoughts  and  feelings  thus  aroused  would  still  be  human,  and  par- 
take of  the  human  finity  and  imperfection.  In  their  highest  state  they  will  be  but 
shadows  of  the  infinite,  figures  of  ineffable  truths." — The  Divine  Human  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, p.  43. 


104  INTRODUCTION  TO 

guages.'  But  a  most  remarkable  fact  of  the  Hebrew  language  is 
Remarkable  that,  for  more  than  a  thousand  years,  it  suffered  no  ma- 
the  "'^Hebrew  Serial  change.  The  Hebrew  of  the  latest  books  of  the 
language.  Old  Testament  is  essentially  the  same  as  that  of  the  old- 

est documents.  Traces  of  change  and  decay  may,  indeed,  be  dis- 
covered in  the  books  of  Ezekiel,  Chronicles,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah; 
but  they  consist  mainly  of  a  few  peculiar  modes  of  expression, 
and  the  introduction  of  various  words  of  a  foreign  cast.  Contact 
with  other  nations  would  naturally  introduce  some  new  forms  of 
speech.  Especially  did  Aramaic  words  and  forms  work  their  way 
into  the  IlebrcAV  books.  But  this  infusion  of  new  words  wrousrht 
no  essential  changes  in  the  structure  of  the  language,  and  many 
forms  which  are  commonly  called  Chaldaisms  are  found  in  the  old- 
est books.  The  fact  is,  the  Hebrew  and  Aramaic  tongues  abode 
side  by  side  for  ages.  The  monumental  stone  heap  which  Jacob 
and  Laban  set  up  in  Mount  Gilead,  Jacob  called  Galeed;  but  Laban, 
the  Syrian,  called  it  Jegnr-sahadutha — an  Aramaic  name  of  the 
same  meaning  as  Galeed  (Gen.  xxxi,  47).  More  frequent  inter- 
course with  Syrians  and  Chaldseans  in  later  times  would  naturally 
leave  its  traces  in  corresponding  fulness  on  the  language  of  the 
Hebrews. 

Three  periods  may  be  distinguished  in  the  Old  Testament  litera- 
Three  periods  ^^^^^'  ^^^  ^^^^  appropriately  be  called,  respectively,  the 
of  Hebrew  lit-  earlier,  the  t)dddle,  and  the  later.  The  first  extended  from 
the  time  of  Moses  to  that  of  Samuel,  the  second  from 
David  to  Hezekiah,  and  the  third  from  the  latter  years  of  the 
kingdom  of  Judah  until  a  few  generations  after  the  return  from 
the  Babylonian  exile.^  But  granting  all  the  evidences  of  decline 
and  change  that  can  be  fairly  established,  it  still  remains  indisput- 
able that  the  Hebrew  language  continued  remarkably  uniform,  and 
in  essentially  the  same  stage  of  development,  from  the  age  of  Moses 

'  Compare  above,  pp.  72,  73. 

'  Gcscnius  declares  for  two  periods,  the  first  extendiiic;  from  the  time  of  Moses  to 
the  Babylonian  exile ;  the  second  from  the  exile  to  the  time  of  the  Maccabees.  These 
periods  he  calls  the  golden  and  the  silver  age.  See  his  (Jeshichte  der  heliraischen 
Sprache  und  Schrift.  Lpz.,  1815.  BiJttcher  follows  Gesenius  in  deciding  for  two 
periods— the  period  of  rise  and  bloom  (B.C.  ]  500-000),  and  the  jjcrlod  of  decline  and 
fall  (B.C.  60()-lc>5).  Each  of  these  periods  he  subdivided  into  three  epochs.  See  his 
Ausfuhrliches  Lehrbuch  der  hebraischen  Sprache,  Einleitung,  pp.  21,  22.  Renan  dis- 
tinguishes three  periods,  the  archaic,  the  classic,  and  the  Chaldaic.  See  his  Histoirc 
generale  des  Langues  Semitiques,  p.  116.  Paris,  1863.  Com[).  Ewald,  Ausfiihrliches 
Lehrbuch,  p.  23,  and  Keil's,  Bleek's  and  De  Wette's  Introductions  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. See  also  the  articles  on  the  Hebrew  Language  in  Hertzog,  Real-encyclopadie, 
the  Encyclopaedia  Britannica,  and  the  various  biblical  dictionaries. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  105 

to  tliat  of  Malaclii,  It  never  changed  so  much  as  even  to  aj^proach 
what  might  be  called  another  dialect.  In  spite  of  migrations,  con- 
quest, invasions,  revolutions,  secession,  and  exile,  the  Hebrew  lan- 
guage, in  which  the  five  books  of  the  Torah  were  cast,  retained  its 
sacred  mould.  Chaldaisms  are  found  in  Genesis,  and  archaisms  in 
Zechariah  and  Malachi. 

Happily,  there  is  little  room  for  dispute  as  to  the  approximate 
dates  of  most  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  A  larsfe  amount 
of  controversy  has  turned  upon  the  books  of  Job  and  Ecclesiastes, 
and  it  is  a  singular  fact  that,  while  some  have  strenuously  con- 
tended that  Job  belongs  to  the  Solomonic  period,  and  Ecclesiastes 
to  a  post-exilian  date,  other  critics,  equally  competent  and  acute, 
maintain  the  Solomonic  authorship  of  Ecclesiastes,  and  attribute 
the  book  of  Job  to  Moses.  This  fact  shows  how  uncertain  and  mis- 
leading are  the  attemj^ts  to  ascertain  the  age  of  a  Hebrew  writer 
solely  from  his  language.  Many  words  and  forms.  Difference  of 
which  are  often  alleged  as  Aramaisms,  may  be  attrib-   diction  no  con- 

.     ^  1  ,,  TT.  .  .  trolling       evi- 

uted,  rather,  to  the  style  and  diction  oi  an  author,  dence  of  date 
Isaiah,  Hosea,  Amos,  Micah,  and  Nahum,  though  nearly  °^  authorship, 
contemporary,  vary  greatly  in  their  style,  and  each  of  them  uses 
words  and  forms  of  expression  not  elsewhere  found ;  and  yet  they 
all  wrote  in  the  same  general  prophetic  strain.  How  many  more 
and  how  much  greater  differences,  then,  are  reasonably  to  be  ex- 
pected between  them  and  writers  of  another  period,  whose  subject- 
matter  is  widely  different !  The  same  author  may  use  a  very  differ- 
ent diction  in  two  different  works,  treating  on  different  themes, 
and  written  twenty  years  apart.  If  Moses  wrote  the  book  of  Job 
■ — especially  if  he  wrote  it  during  the  forty  years  of  his  shepherd 
life  in  Arabia — we  certainly  would  not  expect  such  a  highly  wrought 
poem  to  resemble  the  historical  book  of  Genesis,  even  though  we 
assume  that  Genesis  and  Job  were  written  by  him  about  the  same 
time.  If  Solomon  composed  the  book  of  Ecclesiastes  in  his  old 
age,  there  is  no  sufficient  reason  to  assume  that  his  style  and  lan- 
guage in  that  work  must  closely  resemble  the  Proverbs  and  Canti- 
cles written  nearly  forty  years  previously. 

Such,  then,  are  the  principal  features  of  that  language  in  which 
the  ancient  oracles  of  God  were  embodied,  and  in  jjgbrew  a  lan- 
which  they   are  preserved  to  us   unto  this  day.      Its   RuagopLcuiinr- 

,  ''  .  n  •  n  1    ly   adapted    to 

letters   are   a   picture   gallery;    its   words,    roots,   and   embody  God's 
grammatical  forms   are   intimately  blended  with  pro-   ancient  word. 
foundest  and  divinest  thoughts.     It  may  well  be  called,  emj'hat- 
ically,  the  sacred  tongxie.     It  appears  in  full   development  in  its 
earliest  written  monuments,   as  if   it  had   been   crystallized   into 


106  INTRODUCTION   TO 

imperishable  form  by  tlie  marvels  of  the  exodus  and  the  fires  of 
Sinai.  The  divine  calling  of  Israel,  and  their  national  separateness 
from  all  other  peoples,  served  largely  to  preserve  it  from  any  con- 
siderable change.  It  retained  every  essential  element  of  its 
structure  until  the  canon  of  the  Old  Testament  was  complete,  and 
then  it  ceased  to  be  a  living  language.  But,  though  dead,  it  does 
not  cease  to  speak.  It  seems,  rather,  to  have  arisen,  and  to  flourish 
in  another  and  immortal  life.  When  it  ceased  to  be  a  spoken  lan- 
guage, behold,  it  was  already  petrilied  in  records  more  enduring 
than  the  granite  tables  on  which  the  ten  commandments  were 
written  by  the  finger  of  God.  As  the  ancient  cities,  buried  under 
the  ashes  of  Vesuvius,  now  speak  from  the  tomb  of  ages,  and  re- 
veal the  life  and  customs  of  the  old  Roman  world,  so  the  pictorial 
and  emotional  language  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  transports  us 
into  the  very  heart  and  spirit  of  that  olden  time  when  God  talked 
familiarly  with  men.  Like  the  holy  land,  in  which  this  language 
lived  more  than  a  thousaiul  years,  it  abounds  in  imaejery 

Hebrew      Ian-  .  .,,.■'..  ^.  , 

gunge  like  ihe  that  IS  apt  to  strike  the  imagination  or  aiiect  the  senses. 
Hebrews' land,  j^  ^^^  -^^  some  respects,  a  reflexion  of  Canaan  itself. 
It  has  a  strength  and  permanency  like  the  mountains  about  Jeru- 
salem (Psa.  cxxv,  2).  It  can  whisper  melodious  tones  for  ode  and 
psalm  and  elegy,  soft  and  gentle  as  the  voice  of  the  turtle-dove 
(Cant,  ii,  12),  or  the  gliding  Avaters  of  Shiloh  (Isa.  viii,  0).  It 
can  excite  emotions  of  terror  like  the  rushing  floods  of  the  an- 
cient Kishon,  which  swept  whole  armies  away  (Judges  v,  21),  or 
like  the  thunder  and  earthquake  which  opened  the  beds  of  the  sea, 
and  revealed  the  foundations  of  the  world  (2  Sam.  xxii,  16).  It 
has  landscape  paintings  as  beautiful  as  the  wild  flower  of  Sharon 
(Cant,  ii,  1),  charming  as  the  splendour  and  excellency  of  Carmel, 
and  awe-ins|)iring  as  the  glory  of  Lebanon  (Isa.  xxxv,  2).  Through 
it  all  there  breathes  a  spirit  of  holiness  as  impressive  and  solemn  as 
if  proceeding  fi'om  the  mysterious  darkness  in  which  Jehovah  came 
down  on  Mount  Sinai  (Exod.  xix,  18),  or  from  the  veiled  Holy  of 
Holies  on  the  Mount  Zion  whicli  lu'  loved  (Psa.  Ixxviii,  68).  Sure- 
ly this  language  was  admirably  adapted  to  enshrine  the  law  and 
the  testimony  of  God.  It  is  like  the  wonderful  bush  which  Moses 
saw  at  Iloreb;  behold!  it  burns  continually,  but  is  not  consumed. 
And  when  the  devout  student  comes  within  the  s])ell  of  its  sjjirit 
and  power,  he  may  hear  the  sound  of  a  voice,  exclaiming:  "Pull 
off  thy  sandals  from  thy  feet,  for  the  place  whereon  thou  staudest 
is  holy  ground"  (Exod.  iii,  5). 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  107 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE    CHALDEE    LANGUAGE. 

A  SMALL  portion  of  the  Old  Testament  is  written  in  what  is  com- 
monly called  the  biblical  Chaldee.'  In  Dan.  ii,  4,  Ezra  iv,  7, 
2  Kings  xviii,  26,  and  Isa.  xxxvi,  11,  it  is  called  Aramaic,  nvp-jx,  a 
word  which  is  translated  in  the  English  Version,  after  the  Septua- 
gint,  Vulgate,  and  Luther,  "the  Syrian  tongue."  This  language 
became  early  prevalent  in  all  the  region  known  as  D'JX,  Aram,  the 
Syria  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  and  in  course  of  time  branched 
out  into  two  very  similar  dialects  known  as  the  East- 

-  -v-,r  *  •  rni  t    i  -,.  ~.  Eastern      and 

ern  and  Western  Aramaic,  ihese  dialects  differ  chiefly  western  Ara- 
in  vocalization,  and  each  maintains  an  individuality  of  '"^^°' 
its  own,  but  lexically  and  grammatically  they  are  in  all  essential 
characteristics  most  intimately  related  to  each  other.  The  Western 
Aramaic  is  now  commonly  called  Syriac;  the  Eastern,  Chaldee. 
This  latter  name  has  not  usually  been  satisfactory  to  the  learned, 
some  preferring  the  name  Babylonian,  others  Babylonian-Semitic. 
But  the  name  of  Chaldee  language,  as  applied  to  the  Eastern  Ara- 
maic, has  acquired  too  great  currency  to  be  now  set  Chaideeaprop- 
aside.     It   is  universally  admitted  that  this  lano-uaofe   ^l    "?™°,  f^'' 

•'  .  ^      ^       tlie  biblical  Ar- 

was  in  common  use  among  the  Babylonians  at  the  time  amaic. 
of  the  Jewish  exile,  and  the  Babylonians  are  almost  always  called 
Chaldeans  (Hebrew,  D^'nb'l,  Chasdim)  in  the  Bible.'  Mention  is 
made  in  Dan.  i,  4,  of  "  the  tongue  of  the  Chaldeans,"  and  there 
appears  no  sufiicient  reason  to  believe  that  this  was  any  other  than 
the  common  language  of  Chaldea  at  the  time.^  It  was  sufficiently 
different  from  the  Jews'  language   (comp.   2   Kings  xviii,  26)  to 

'  The  Chaldee  portions  are  Jer.  x,  11,  Dan.  ii,  4-vii,  28,  and  Ezra  iv,  8-vi,  18,  and 
vii,  12-26. 

'  Compare  especially  2  Kings  xxiv,  2 ;  xxv,  4,  5,  10,  13,  etc. ;  Isa.  xiii,  19 ;  xliii,  14; 
xlvii,  1  ;  Jer.  xxi,  4,  9  ;  xxxii,  4,  5,  24,  etc. ;  xxxvii,  5,  8,  9  ;  1,  1,  8,  10,  13,  etc. ;  Ezek. 
i,  3,  12,  13;  Hab.  i,  6. 

'  Most  recent  critics  (see  especially  Stnart,  Keil,  and  Zockler,  in  loco)  hold  that  the 
D^'nb'3  \^th-,  tongue  of  the  Chasdim  (Dan.  i,  4)  was  the  learned  language  of  the 
priests  and  wise  men,  and  the  court  language  of  the  empire,  as  distinguished  from  the 
Aramaic,  the  language  of  the  common  people.  They  urge  that  in  Dan.  ii,  2,  4,  5,  10 ; 
iv,  7;  V,  V,  11,  the  Chasdim  are  a  special  and  predominant  class  among  the  wise  men 
of  Babylon,  and  represent  an  ancient  tribe  or  people  of  non-Semitic  speecli.  But  it 
is  also  a  fact  that  Daniel  applies  the  word  Chasdim  to  the  inhabitants  of  Bal)y Ionia 


108  INTRODUCTION   TO 

make  it  an  object  to  instruct  the  young  men  who  were  to  be  trained 
for  the  royal  service  in  its  written  and  spoken  (pi^v''  "i.???  Dan.  i,  4) 
forms.  During  the  seventy  years  of  their  exile  the  Jewish  people 
largely  lost  the  use  of  their  ancestral  language,  and  appropriated 
this  Chaldean  dialect.  When  they  returned  to  rebuild  their  huly 
city  and  temple,  they  required  to  have  the  language  of  their 
sacred  books  explained  to  them  (Neh.  viii,  8).  They  never  again 
recovered  the  use  of  the  Hebrew  as  a  vernacular,  but  continued 
to  use  the  Chaldean  dialect  until  Jerusalem  was  taken  by  the 
Romans. 

When  Abram  migrated  from  Ur  of  the  Chaldeans,  the  differ- 
ences between  the  Semitic  tongues  were  doubtless  fewer  and  less 
noticeable  than  in  the  days  of  Ezra  or  of  Daniel.'     After  the  time 

.  ,       of  David,  when  intercourse  between  the  Israelites  and 
Hebrew  inter-  ' 

course  with  Ar-  the  Syrians  of  Damascus  became  more  frequent,  Ara- 
amaic.  maisms  would  naturally  work  their  way  into  the  Hebrew 

lanofuaere  of  Palestine.  The  Chaldee  verse  in  Jer.  x,  11  is  be- 
lieved  by  many  to  be  a  gloss,  interpolated  in  the  time  of  the  exile, 
or  very  soon  afterward,^  but  the  language  and  style  of  Jeremiah 
show  many  evidences  of  Aramaic  influence.  At  the  time  of  his 
prophesying  the  Chaldeans  were  overrunning  Palestine  (Jer.  xxxiv), 
and  he  survived  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  was  carried 
down  into  Egypt  (Jer.  xxxix,  xl).  The  language  of  Ezekiel's 
projihecies  evinces  the  growing  power  of  Araraean  sjjeech  over 
the  Hebrew  mind,  and  "the  manifold  anomalies  and  corruptions  in 
his  writings  betray  the  decline  and  approaching  ruin  of  the  Hebrew 
language,  and  remind  us  that  the  prophet's  home  is  in  a  foreign 
land."^ 

(Dan.  V,  30 ;  ix,  1),  and  in  all  the  other  books  of  the  Old  Testament  this  is  its  common 
meaninf^.  It  is  further  urged  that  the  use  of  the  word  Aramaic  (n^D"lN)  hi  Dan. 
ii,  4,  implies  that  these  learned  Chasdim  addressed  the  king  in  the  common  language 
of  the  empire,  and  not  the  learned  tongue  of  the  i)riesthood  and  the  court.  This, 
however,  is  by  no  means  clear.  Why  may  not  "the  tongue  of  the  Chaldecs"  be  also 
called  Aramaic  V  This  was  the  conuuon  name  used  by  Ilclirew  writers  for  the  lan- 
guage of  Chaldea,  and  it  was  every  way  natural  for  the  author  of  Dan.  ii,  4,  to  use 
the  word  fl'DIX,  as  Ezra  does  (in  Ezra  iv,  7),  although  he  had  already  spoken  of  the 

same  language  (in  i.  4)  as  the  Chaldee  tongue.  If,  as  these  critics  say,  the  tongue  of 
the  Chasdim  was  the  court  language  of  Nebuchadnezzar  and  his  dynasty,  this  tongue, 
by  all  means,  should  have  been  used  before  the  king.  No  satisfactory  reason  is  given 
for  their  using  any  other.  See  Bleek,  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  vol.  i,  pp. 
47,  48.     English  Translation  by  Venable-s,  Lond.,  1875. 

'  Compare  page  77,  above. 

*  So  Ho\ibigant,  Venenia,  Dathe,  Blayney,  Doederlein,  llosenmiiller,  Maurer,  Ewald, 
Graf,  Henderson,  and  Xaegelsbach. 

'  Keil,  Introduction  to  Old  Testament,  vol.  i,  p.  356. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  109 

Daniel,  who  received  an  early   and   thorough   training  in   the 

tongue  of  the  Chaldeans,  is  the  first  biblical  writer  who 

r  11  1  1  •       T    1  •  -1  .   .  T^^     Chaldee 

lonnally  employs  this   dialect  m  sacred   composition,   passages      of 

After  having  narrated  in  Hebrew  the  successful  train-  ^''°'®^- 
ing  of  himself  and  his  three  companions,  he  passes,  in  the  second 
chapter,  to  an  account  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream,  and  from  verse 
4,  where  the  Chaldeans  begin  their  address  to  the  king:  "O  king, 
forever  live!  "  the  language  changes  to  Aramaic.  This  being  the 
very  language  in  which  all  the  conversation  of  the  court  was  car- 
ried on,  its  use  here  gives  to  Daniel's  narrative  a  life-like  reality, 
and  is  a  monumental  evidence  of  the  genuineness  and  authenticity 
of  the  record.  Only  a  writer  of  Daniel's  time  and  position,  and 
bilinguous  as  he,  would  have  written  thus.  Nebuchadnezzar's 
dream  was  a  God-given  vision  of  world-empire,  and  of  its  final 
overthrow  by  the  power  and  kingdom  of  God;  and  the  dream  and 
its  interpretation  were  written  down  in  a  language  then  common 
alike  to  the  people  of  God  and  to  the  mightiest  empire  of  the 
world.  The  succeeding  narratives  of  the  golden  image  and  the  de- 
liverance of  Daniel's  three  companions  from  the  burning  furnace 
(chap,  iii),  Nebuchadnezzar's  proclamation  (chap,  iv),  Belshazzar's 
feast  and  sudden  overthrow  (chap,  v),  and  Daniel's  deliverance 
from  the  lion's  den  (chap,  vi),  were  also  recorded  in  the  language 
of  the  empire,  for  they  were  written  for  the  world  to  know. 
Finally,  Daniel's  great  vision  of  world-empire  and  its  overthrow 
(chap,  vii),  is  also  recorded  in  Chaldee,  for  it  was  only  a  repetition 
under  other  symbols  and  in  fuller  form  of  the  prophecy  embodied 
in  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream  (chap.  ii).  This  prophecy  was  for  the 
whole  world  rather  than  for  any  special  purpose  of  fhe  Jewish  peo- 
ple; but  when,  in  the  eighth  chapter,  the  prophet  passes  to  visions 
of  more  special  import  for  his  own  people,  he  resumes  the  Hebrew. 
The  other  writer  of  biblical  Chaldee  is  Ezra,  the  learned  priest 
and  scribe,  who  flourished  about  a  century  after  Daniel.  TheChaWeeof 
He  went  up  from  Babylon  to  Jerusalem,  in  company  Ezra. 
with  a  large  number  of  the  exiles,  during  the  reign  of  the  Persian 
king  Artaxerxes  Longimanus  (B.  C.  457).  Familiar  from  youth 
with  the  Chaldee  dialect  of  Babylon,  he  also  by  diligent  study 
made  himself  familiar  with  the  sacred  literature  of  his  nation,  that 
he  might  be  able  to  instruct  the  peojDle  of  his  age  in  the  law  of 
Jehovah  (Ezra  vii,  I-IO).  The  great  mass  of  these  returning  exiles 
had  lost  the  use  of  their  ancestral  language,'  and  now  spoke  the 

'  It  is  not  to  be  supposed,  however,  that  all  the  exiles  lost  the  use  of  Hebrew. 
Many  of  the  better  classes  preserved  it,  and  the  use  of  it  in  the  books  of  Ezra,  Xel:e- 
miah,  Haggai,  Zeehariah,  and  Malachi  implies  that  it  was  yet  familiar  to  many. 


110  INTRODUCTION   TO 

common  language  of  the  Chaldeans  among  whom  they  had  sojourned 
more  than  seventy  years.  In  connexion  with  other  Levites  and 
with  ISTehemiah,  Ezra  Avas  wont  to  assemble  the  people,  and  read 
and  explain  to  them  the  hook  of  the  law  of  Moses  (Neh.  viii,  1-8). 
The  ao-reement  of  ancient  traditions  in  associating  Ezra  with  the 
Great  Svnao-oo-ue,  and  the  formation  of  the  Old  Testament  Canon, 
may  authorize  us  to  believe  that,  in  connexion  with  Nehemiah  and 
other  leading  Jews  of  his  time,  he  did  collect  and  arrange  the  books 
of  the  Jewish  Canon  in  substantially  the  form  in  which  we  now 
possess  them.  He  lived  at  a  time  when  such  a  work  could  best  be 
done,  and  he  had  facilities  for  it  Avhich  no  later  age  possessed. 
Ezra  was  unquestionably  one  of  the  greatest  men  of  Israel,  and 
his  mighty  influence  over  the  people  is  attested  by  the  numerous 
traditions  which  still  linger  about  his  name. 

Such  being  the  historical  position  and  character  of  this  writer,  we 
can  readily  understand  the  bilingual  character  of  the  book  which 
bears  his  name.  When,  at  chapter  iv,  8,  he  has  occasion  to  insert 
the  letter  of  the  Samaritans  to  zVrtaxerxes  (Smerdis),  which  is  em- 
phatically said  to  have  been  written  and  translated  into  Aramaic, 
he  naturally  gives  it  in  the  language  in  which  he  found  it  written — 
a  language  perfectly  familiar  to  himself  and  his  people.  For  the 
same  reason  he  continues  his  narrative  in  the  Aramaic  language  as 
far  as  chap,  vi,  18;  for  this  part  of  his  book  is  principally  devoted 
to  foreign  and  international  affairs,  and  contains  copies  of  letters  to 
and  from  Artaxerxes  and  Darius.'  So,  also,  the  copy  of  Artaxerxes' 
letter  and  decree,  in  chap,  vii,  12-26,  is  inserted  without  note  or 
comment  in  this  Aramaic  language.  Such  a  peculiar  use  of  two 
languages,  or  dialects,  was  perfectly  in  keeping  with  the  age  and 
circumstances  of  Ezra,  who  was  equally  familiar  with  both  tongues; 
but  it  could  scarcely  be  explicable  in  a  writer  of  any  other  age  or 
nation.  Ezra  had  no  sufficient  reason  to  translate  these  Aramaic 
documents,  which  he  found  ready  for  his  use.  Rather,  we  may 
say,  he  was  divinely  inspired  and  overruled  to  preserve  them  in 
just  the  form  in  which  he  found  them.  Tlieir  subject-matter,  like 
the  Aramaic  portions  of  Daniel,  had  special  lessons  for  the  Gentile 
world,  and  it  was  Avell  for  them  to  be  published  and  made  immor- 
tal in  the  language  of  that  nation  with  whose  name  the  exile  of  the 
Hebrews  was  to  be  forever  associated. 

1  It  is  prol)iihle  that  the  whole  Chaldoe  section,  from  chap,  iv,  8  to  vi,  18,  is  an  older 
document,  written  by  a  contemporary  of  Zerubhabel,  fur  in  chap,  v,  4,  the  writer  uses 
the  first  person,  as  if  he  were  a  participant  in  the  matters  described.  Ezra  appropri- 
ated this  document,  containing;  an  authentic  history  of  the  troubles  attending  the  re- 
building of  the  temple,  just  as  he  did  the  document  of  names  and  numljcrs  in  chap.  ii. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  Ill 

Tliis  Chaldean  language,  being,  like  the  Hebrew,  only  a  dia- 
lectical outgrowth  of  the  original  Semitic  speech,  is,  in  its  genius, 
idioms,  and  general  structure,  substantially  the  same  as  Hebrew, 
Among  its  chief  peculiarities  are  (1)  the  use  of  nouns 

•      ^1  1     ^-        r^  ^  mi  •  T  .  ,       •,        Grammatical 

m  the  emphatic  state,  i  his  usage  does  away  with  the  pecuiiai ities  of 
article,  so  that  where  the  Hebrew  would  have  t]!p?3ri,  ^^^  chaidee. 
hmnmelek,  the  king,  the  Chaidee  has  N3^p,  tnalka.  (2)  The  termi- 
nation of  the  masculine  j^lural  of  nouns  in  p —  where  the  Hebrew 
has  D''—  (3)  The  use  of  the  relative  H  (shortened  prefix  'n)  in  the 
various  senses  in  which  the  Hebrew  employs  "IK'N,  and  also  as  a 
sign  of  the  genitive  case.  (4)  A  pleonastic  use  of  the  suffix  pro- 
nouns; as  "unto  Mm,  unto  Artaxerxes,  the  king  (Ezra  iv,  11);  "the 
name  of  Mm,  of  God"  (Dan.  ii,  20).  (5)  There  are  three  ordinary 
conjugations  of  the  verb,  the  Peal,  Pael,  and  Aphel,  corresponding 
substantially  with  the  Kal,  Piel,  and  Hiphil  in  Hebrew,'  and  each 
of  these  has  a  passive  or  reflexive  mode,  formed  by  prefixing  the 
syllable  nx,  thus : 

Simple.  Intensive.  Causative. 

Peal,       ^pp  Pael,       ^Jts,?  Aphel,       bi:^i^^ 

Ithpeal,  ^tpi^riX  Ithpaal,  b'apm  Ittaphal,    bl^\?m 

In  Chaidee,  as  in  Hebrew,  there  are  also  several  rare  and  peculiar 
conjugations,  and  the  biblical  Chaidee  makes  use  of  the  conjuga- 
tions Hiphil  and  Hophal,  and  in  other  instances  uses  n  instead  of  ^?. 
We  also  find  in  Chaidee  imperatives  in  the  passive  form,  and  a  dis- 
tinct masculine  and  feminine  termination  (^ —  and  H—)  for  the  third 
person  plural  of  the  past  tense.  The  participle  is  also  used  for  the 
finite  verb,  and  is  construed  with  nouns  and  pronouns  far  more 
frequently  than  in  Hebrew.  In  its  lexical  forms  the  Chaidee  is 
specially  noticeable  in  its  use  of  the  letters  T  instead  of  T,  n  and  £3 
instead  of  lt\  and  y  instead  of  V. 

In  the  few  Aramean  chapters  of  our  Bible  we  can  scarcely  expect 
to  find  a  very  full  illustration  of  all  the  peculiarities  of  this  lan- 
guage. In  its  general  spirit  and  form  we  trace,  however,  a  ten- 
dency to  depart  from  the  suggestive  brevity  of  expression  which 
we  notice  in  the  ancient  Hebrew,  and  to  leave  less  to  the  imagina- 
tion and  understanding  of  the  reader.  There  is  less  of  animation 
and  freshness  of  thought,  and  more  of  effort  to  set  forth  facts  and 
ideas  with  fulness  and  precision.  Nevertheless,  we  occasionally 
meet  with  passages  of  peculiar  force  and  emotion.  Notice  the  pe- 
culiar pleonastic  structure  and  style  of  the  following  verse,  which 
we  translate  literally  from  Dan.  iii,  8 :  "  All  because  of  this,  in  it, 
'  Comp.  the  Hebrew  paradigm  above,  page  81. 


113  INTRODUCTION  TO 

tlie  time,  approached  men,  Chaldeans,  and  devoured  the  pieces  of 
them,  of  tlie  Jews."  The  expression,  devoured  tlieir  pieces,  is  meta- 
phorical, denoting  the  rabid  fury  of  the  Chaldeans  in  accusing  the 
Jews,  as  if,  like  ravenous  beasts,  they  would  tear  them  into  bits, 
and  devour  them.  In  the  twenty -fifth  verse  of  the  same  chapter, 
mark  the  mingled  excitement  and  awe  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  words: 
"Ha!  I  see  men,  four,  unbound,  walking  in  the  midst  of  the  fire, 
and  hurt  there  is  not  in  them,  and  the  aspect  of  him,  of  the  fourth, 
is  like  to  a  son  of  the  gods ! "  Some  passages  naturally  fall  into 
parallelisms,  as  the  following,  from  Nebuchadnezzar's  proclamation 
(Dan.  iv,  10-14): 

I  w!is  looking,  and  behold,  a  tree  in  the  midst  of  the  land, 

And  tlie  height  of  it  was  great; 

Greatly  increased  became  the  tree,  and  mighty, 

And  the  height  of  it  was  reaching  to  the  heavens, 

And  the  sight  of  it  to  the  end  of  all  the  land. 

Its  foliage  was  beautiful,  and  its  fruit  abundant, 

And  there  was  food  in  it  for  all. 

Under  it  the  beast  of  the  field  found  shade. 

And  in  its  branches  dwelt  the  birds  of  heaven, 

And  from  it  all  flesh  was  fed. 

I  was  looking,  in  the  visions  of  my  head,  upon  my  bed, 

And  behold,  a  watcher,  even  a  holy  one, 

And  from  the  heavens  he  descended; 

He  called  aloud,  and  thus  he  spoke: 

Cut  down  the  tree,  and  lop  oil  its  branches, 

Remove  its  foliage,  and  scatter  its  fruit, 

Let  the  beast  run  away  from  under  it, 

And  the  birds  from  its  branches. 

The  current  language  of  such  a  world-empire  as  that  of  Babylon 
would  naturally  appropriate  many  foreign  words.  It 
orepnwor  s.  gj^^^^i^^  therefore,  occasion  no  surprise  to  find  Median, 
Persian,  and  Greek  words  in  Chaldee  writings  belonging  to  the  era 
of  Nebu(^hadnezzar,'  This  Chaldean  dialect,  adopted  by  the  Jews 
durino:  their  exile,  was  retained  by  them  after  their  return  to  their 
fatherland.  The  pi-ophecies  of  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi, 
and  the  books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  were  written  in  Hebrew,  for 
they  were  to  have  a  place  among  the  sacred  books,"  but  the  com- 

'  See  Rawlinson  on  the  Persian  words  in  Ezra,  and  also  the  Excursus  on  Persian 
words  in  Daniel,  in  the  Speaker's  Commentarj',  vol.  iii,  p.  421  and  vol.  vi,  p.  2<f>. 

'  The  lic'hrew  did  not  altogether  go  out  of  use  until  long  after  tlie  return  from  the 
Babylonian  exile.  It  was  used  by  such  men  as  Haggai,  Ezra,  and  other  prophets, 
priests,  and  scribes  of  the  law.  Keil  thinks  the  later  prophets  studied  to  imitate  the 
style  of  the  oldest  Hebrew,  and  therefore  used  archaisms  from  the  Pentateuch. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  113 

mon  language  of  the  people  was  this  Babylonian-Aramaic,  Avhich 
maintained  itself  in  Palestine  during  the  periods  of  Persian,  Greek, 
and  Roman  dominion.  It  is  called  Judaic  (nnin^)  in  Neh.  xiii,  24, 
and  HchraistiCy  or  the  Hebraic  dialect,  in  the  Apocrypha  and  in  the 
New  Testament.'  The  numerous  Chaldee  words  used  in  the  New 
Testament^  are  also  an  evidence  that  it  was  the  common  language 
of  Palestine  in  the  time  of  our  Lord.^  Its  most  considerable  lit- 
erature is  contained  in  the  Targums,  the  oldest  of  which  were  prob- 
ably Avritten  before  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era.* 

It  is  not  without  historical  significance  that  Ezra  and  Daniel 
wrote  a  portion  of  the  Scriptures  in  this  language  of  the  Chal- 
dees.  These  chapters  abide  a  monumental  witness  of  Israel's  con- 
tact with  the  mighty  world-powers.  Out  of  the  land  Historical  and 
of  the  Chaldees  Abram  was  called,  and  in  him,  it  was   apologetic  vai- 

•  T      1  11    r-        •!•  T  •  CI  Till    ue  of  the  Chal- 

said  that  all  tamihes  and  nations  or  the  earth  should  dee  parts  of  the 
be  blessed.  After  fourteen  centuries  of  religious  cul-  ^'^e. 
ture  and  revelation,  his  sons,  by  many  thousands,  were  carried  back 
into  the  same  Chaldean  land.  Through  Daniel  in  Babylon  God 
made  his  wonders  and  power  known  to  the  mightiest  nations  of  the 
world,  and  Israel's  exile  in  Babylon,  like  Joseph's  life  in  Egypt,  served 
the  double  purpose  of  2>i"eserving  the  chosen  people  from  utter  ruin 
by  idolatry,  into  which  they  had  been  fast  running  in  Canaan,  and 
of  showino-  forth  to  the  mightiest  nation  of  the  earth  the  wisdom 
and  power  of  God.  Daniel  wrote  in  the  tongue  of  the  Chaldeans 
the  fall  of  that  mighty  monarchy,  which  was  symbolized  by  the 
golden  head  of  the  image  (Dan.  ii,  32,  38),  and  the  great  lion  with 
eagle's  wings  (vii,  4).  Ezra  wrote  in  the  same  tongue  the  conflicts 
of  the  restored  Israel  with  other  heathen  powers.  Tliese  chapters 
foreshadow  a  gradual  transition  to  a  new  era,  and  led  the  way  to 
the  subsequent  appropriation  of  the  Greek  language,  in  which  the 
New  Testament  Scriptures  appear. 

^'Ej3palar[  and  rrj  'E,5pai(5i  6La}.EKTu.  See  Prologue  to  Ecclesiasticus  and  John 
V,  2;  xix,  13,  17,  20;  Acts  xxi,  40;  xxii,  2;  xxvi,  14. 

'Such  as  Raca  (Matt,  v,  22),  Golgotha  (Matt,  xxvii,  3"),  TaUlha  cumi  (Mark  v,  41), 
Corhan  (Mark  vii,  11),  Ephphatha  (Mark  vii,  34),  Rabboni  (Mark  x,  51),  Abba  (Mark 
xiv,  36),  Gabbntha  (John  xix,  13),  Aceldamn  (Acts  i,  19),  Maran  aiha  (1  Cor.  xvi,  22). 

'  See  the  Essay  of  Prof.  H.  F.  Pfannkuche,  On  the  prevalence  of  the  AraniBcan 
Language  in  Palestine  in  the  Age  of  Christ  and  the  Apostles ;  translated  from  the 
German  by  E.  Robinson,  in  the  Biblical  Repository,  for  April,  1831. 

■*  For  a  convenient  account  of  the  character  and  age  of  the  Targums,  see  Harm  an, 
Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  pp.  52-55,  and  the  Appendix  to 
Hackctt's  translation  of  Winer's  Grammar  of  the  Chaldee  Language,  Andover,  1845. 
See  also  the  Biblical  Cvclopiedias  under  the  v.-ord  Targums.     . 
8 


114  INTRODUCTION   TO 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE    GREEK     LANGUAGE. 

The  Greek  language  belongs  to  the  so-called  Indo-European  lamily. 
An  indo-Eiiro-  which  extends  from  the  eastern  boundary  of  India  to 
pean  tougue.  ^]^q  western  shores  of  Europe.  Midway  between  these 
two  extremes,  on  that  iEgean  shore  "  where  every  sight  is  beauty, 
and  every  breatli  a  balm,"  the  nation  of  the  Greeks  arose  and 
flourished.  In  ideals  of  government,  in  models  of  taste,  in  oratory, 
mathematics,  architecture,  sculpture,  history,  and  philosophy,  they 
have  furnished  the  masterpieces  of  the  world.  In  these  several  de- 
partments, Solon,  Homer,  Demosthenes,  Euclid,  Phidias,  Thucyd- 
ides,  and  Plato,  are  representative  and  immortal  names. 

It  has  long  been  observed  that  natural  scenery  has  much  to  do 
witli  the  development  of  national  life,  and  may  give  character  to 
the  civilization  of  a  people.  We  have  already  called  attention  to 
the  fact  that  Hebrew  civilization  and  literature  resemble  the  varied 
Languarre  and  sceuory  of  the  Holy  Land.  So  may  avc  also  trace  a 
civilization  af-  relationship  between  the  land  of  the  Greeks,  and  that 
rai  scenery  and  exquisite  literature  and  versatile  life  and  talent  exhib- 
chmate.  -^^^^  j,^  their  remaining  monuments  of  science  and  art. 

"  If  we  inquire  into  the  causes  of  this  singular  excellence,"  says 
W.  S.  Tyler,  "  God  laid  the  foundations  for  it  when  he  laid  the 
foundations  of  the  earth;  when  he  based  the  Avhole  country,  not, 
like  England  and  America,  upon  coal  and  iron,  but  upon  Pentelic, 
Hymettian,  and  Parian  marble  ;  when  he  not  only  built  the  moun- 
tains round  about  Athens  of  the  finest  materials  for  sculpture 
and  architecture,  but  fashioned  their  towering  fronts  and  gently 
sloping  summits  into  the  perfect  model  of  a  Grecian  temple,  and 
lifted  from  the  midst  of  the  plain  the  Acropolis  and  Mars'  Hill — fit 
pedestals  for  temples  and  statues,  fit  abodes  for  gods  and  god-like 
men;  when  he  reared  to  heaven  Helicon,  Parnassus,  and  the  snow- 
capjicd  Olympus,  -where  dwelt  the  muses  and  the  gods,  and  poured 
down  their  sides  the  rivers  in  which  the  river-gods  had  their  dwell- 
ing})lace,  and  from  which  the  muses  derived  their  origin;  when  he 
diversified  the  whole  country  Avith  mountain  and  valley,  with  plain 
and  ])romontory,  with  sea  and  land,  with  fountain,  and  river,  and 
bay,  and  strait,  aiul  island,  and  isthmus,  and  peninsula,  as  no  other 
country  in  the  world,  within  the  same  compass,  is  diversified,  and 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  Ho, 

thus  gave  to  each  district  ahuost  every  variety  of  soil,  climate,  and 
natural  scenery;  when  he  drew  the  outline  of  the  shores  windino- 
and  waving,  as  if  for  the  very  purpose  of  realizing  the  ideal  line  of 
beauty,  and  spread  around  them  the  clear,  liquid,  laughino-  waters 
of  the  T:oXv(f)Xoio(3oio  6a/iaaoi]g,^  and  poured  over  sea  and  land  the 
pure  transparent  air  and  bright  sunshine  which  distino-uish  Gi'eece 
in  the  dry  season  scarcely  less  than  the  rainless  Egypt,  and  cano- 
pied the  whole  with  that  Avonderfully  deep  and  liquid  sky,  blue 
down  to  the  very  horizon,  which  is  the  never-ceasing  admiration  of 
foreigners  who  visit  Athens."^ 

The  Greeks  were  first  so  called  by  the  Latins,  A^ho  probably 
obtained  their  earliest  acquaintance  with  them  from  The  Greeks 
one  of  their  northern  tribes  called  the  Gra^ci  (TpaiKOi).  called  Hellenes. 
Thence  the  name  passed  into  most  of  the  languages  of  Europe. 
But  the  more  proper  name  of  the  nation  was  Hellenes  {"EXXipeg), 
and  the  entire  territory  they  occupied  was  called  in  general  Hellas. 
The  earliest  settlements  and  history  of  the  Hellenes  are  veiled  in 
obscurity.  The  common  tradition  is,  that  they  were  descended 
from  Hellen,  the  son  of  Deucalion  and  Pyrrha,  who  survived  the 
flood.  According  to  the  genealogy  of  nations  given  in  the  tenth 
chapter  of  Genesis,  we  trace  them  back  to  Javan,  the  son  of 
Japheth  (Gen.  x,  2).  The  name  Javan  (|V)  is  the  Hebrew  equiva- 
lent of  Ion  ( "Iw?^),  the  traditional  ancestor  of  the  lonians,  Avith 
whom  the  Phoenicians  and  the  Semitic  peojDles  would  naturally 
identify  the  entire  Hellenic  race.* 

The  ancient  Hellenes  early  branched  off  into  numerous  tribes, 
known  as  the  Dorians,  iEolians,  Achfeans,  and  lonians.  Tribes  and  ciia- 
and,  according  to  that  linguistic  law  which  we  have  '^cts. 
noticed  above,*  these  scattered  tribes  soon  became  distinguished  by 
differences  of  dialect.  Not  only  may  we  now  discover  the  princi- 
pal dialects,  viz.,  the  Doric,  ^Eolic,  Ionic,  and  Attic,^  and  trace 
different  periods  in  the  dcAxdopment  of  these,  such  as  old,  middle, 
and  new;  but  less  noticeable  differences  may  be  also  traced,  as  the 
more  or  less  divergent  speech  of  the  Thessalonians,  Boeotians, 
Laconians,  and  Sicilians.     Passing  by  the  confused  legends  of  the 

'  "  Many-fsounding  sea,"  Homer,  Iliad,  i,  34. 

*  Oration  at  Andover  Theological  Seminary  on  Atliens,  or  Esthetic  Culture  and  the 
Art  of  Expression,  imblished  in  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  Jan.,  1863. 

''  See  Smith,  Dictionary  of  tlic  Bihle,  article  Javan. 

^  See  page  ^2. 

^  See,  on  these  several  dialects,  the  second  and  improved  edition  of  Kiihner,  Aus- 
fiahrliche  Grammatik  der  griechiseben  Sprache,  Einleitung,  pp.  t-SV.  Hannover, 
1869-70. 


116  INTRODUCTION   TO 

earliest  migrations,  and  the  history  and  peculiarities  of  the  Doric 
and  ^olic  dialects,  we  may  well  believe  that  the  lonians  having 
crossed  the  xEgean  Sea  from  Athens,  settled  on  the  western  coast 
of  Asia  Minor,  and  took  the  le^d  of  all  the  Greek  tribes  in  the 
develoi^ment  of  literature  and  art.  The  most  ancient 
monuments  of  their  literature  are  the  poems  of  Homer 
and  Hesiod.  But  it  would  scarcely  be  proper  to  assume  that  the 
lano-uage  of  these  poems  was  the  common  language  of  the  people. 
As  poets,  they  would  be  likely  to  appropriate  many  archaic  and 
unusual  forms.  Hence  the  Greek  language,  as  exhibited  in  these 
most  ancient  works,  is  called  the  Epic.  A  later  form  of  Ionic 
si)eech  is  seen  in  the  few  fragments  of  lyric  poetry  attributed  to 
Archilochus,  Callinus,  and  Mimnermus.  To  a  still  later  period  be- 
lono-s  the  well-known  Ionic  prose  writer  and  historian,  Herodotus. 
These  writings  represent,  respectively,  the  old,  the  middle,  and  the 
new  Ionic  Greek.  This  dialect  is  believed  to  represent  more  near- 
ly than  others  the  ancient  Hellenic  language.  Its  early  and  impor- 
tant literature  would  naturally  give  it  a  permanency,  but,  after  their 
first  remarkable  activity,  the  lonians  declined. 

Meanwhile  Athens,  the  mother  city  of  the  lonians,  began  to  rise 
in  power  and  fame,  and  gradually  acquired  supremacy  among  the 
Grecian  cities.  The  Attic  capital  became  the  centre  of  intellec- 
tual activity.  Thither  repaired  Hellenic  youths  from  all  the  tribes 
to  study  models  of  elegance  and  taste,  and  the  Attic  di- 
Atccu  ure.  ^\qq^^  became,  by  degrees,  the  language  of  the  educated 
classes  throughout  the  states  of  Greece.  But  in  the  Attic,  as  in 
the  Ionic,  we  may  note  three  periods,  the  old,  the  middle,  and  the 
new.  The  old  Attic  differed  but  little  from  the  Ionic,  for  the 
lonians  were  originally  inhabitants  of  Attica.  In  this  dialect  the 
distinouishcd  Athenian  lawgiver,  Solon,  wrote  his  laAvs  and  poems, 
several  fragments  of  which  are  still  extant.  The  middle  Attic  rep- 
resents the  language  in  the  golden  period  of  its  elegance  and  glory. 
Its  classic  monuments  are  the  historical  works  of  Thucydides  and 
Xenophon,  the  orations  of  Isocrates  and  Lj^sias,  the  philosophical 
dialogues  of  Plato,  and  the  dramatic  poetry  of  ^schylus,  Sopho- 
cles, Euripides,  and  Aristophanes.  The  new  Attic  is  usually  dated 
from  Demosthenes  and  -^Eschincs,  Avhose  orations  are  regarded 
as  models  of  eloquence.  But  after  the  Macedonian  conquest 
(B.C.  338)  the  Attic  dialect  suffered  a  gradual  decay.  The  lan- 
guage of  the  Macedonians,  though  genuine  Greek,  was  probably 
Dt'oay  of  Attic  "cver  reduced  to  writing  by  the  natives;  but  the  ascend- 
eiegance.  ency  of  these  ruder  northerners,  and  their  subversion 

of   the   independence   of   Athens,  had  the   necessary  tendency  to 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  117 

corrupt  the  classic  speech  of  Attica,  A  fusion  of  dialects  ensued. 
Alexander  the  Great,  trained  by  the  philosopher  Aristotle,  who 
used  the  Attic,  must  have  become  early  familiar  with  that  dialect 
and  its  literature,  and  his  mighty  conquests  sjDread  this  lan- 
guage over  all  Western  Asia,  and  into  Egypt.  The  breaking  up 
and  intermingling  of  rival  states  and  communities,  and  the  found- 
ing of  Greek  colonies  in  many  parts  of  this  vast  territory,  led  to 
numerous  departures  from  the  classic  forms  of  Attic  speech.  Nev- 
ertheless, the  Attic  dialect  remained  the  basis  and  controlling  fac- 
tor of  this  later  Greek.     This  widespread  lansruasre  of 

The  later  Attic 

the  Macedonian  Empire,  from  its  appropriation  of  or  common  dia- 
words  and  forms  from  various  sources,  and  from  its  ^^'^^' 
general  use,  received  the  name  of  the  common  dialect  {rj  kolvt) 
SidXeKTog).  The  successors  of  Alexander  maintained  and  spread  its 
use  into  all  the  principal  towns  and  cities.  On  the  reduction  of 
Corinth  to  a  Roman  province  (B.  C.  146)  this  Greek  language  and 
literature  extended  w^estward,  and  eveiy  educated  Roman  became 
familiar  with  it.  At  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era,  this  com- 
mon dialect  was  written,  read,  and  spoken  from  Spain  on  the  west 
to  the  borders  of  India  on  the  east,  and  from  Sarmatia  on  the  north 
to  Ethiopia  in  the  south.  "  If  any  one  imagines,"  says  Cicero, 
"that  a  less  amount  of  glory  is  to  be  derived  from  Greek  than 
from  Latin  verses,  he  greatly  errs,  for  Greek  writings  are  read 
in  almost  all  regions,  while  the  Latin  are  confined  within  their 
own  limits,  which  are  narrow  enough." '  One  of  the  fragm.ents  of 
Epictetus  declares  that  "  in  Rome  the  women  hold  Plato's  Repub- 
lic in  their  hands."*  "What  do  the  Greek  cities  desire,"  asks  Sen- 
eca, "in  the  midst  of  barbarian  countries?  What  means  the  Mace- 
donian speech  among  Indians  and  Persians  ? "  ^  It  is  obvious, 
therefore,  how  the  common  language  of  the  widespread  Macedonian 
Empire  would  naturally  gather  something  from  almost  every  quar- 
ter. The  later  Greek  had  no  longer  a  variety  of  dialects,  in  the 
older  sense,  but  blended  many  of  those  ancient  local  peculiarities, 
and  adopted  not  a  few  foreign  idioms.  Yet,  in  some  places,  old 
forms  would  maintain  themselves  more  or  less  fully.  Atticisms 
would  prevail  at  Athens,  and  Doric  forms  in  the  districts  where 
the  old  Doric  had  formerly  prevailed. 

The  principal  literary  centres  of  this  later  Attic  or  common  dia- 
lect were  Athens,  Antioch,  and  Alexandria.     The  last- 
named  city,  founded  by  Alexander  himself,  whose  keen     ^  ''''^'■ycen  res. 
foresight  perceived  that  a  city  occupying  this  site  must  certainly 

'  Oratio  pro  A.  Licinio  Archia,  sec.  23.  ''Epiet.,  Frag.  53. 

^L.  AnniEus  Seneca,  Do  cotisohitioue  ad  IleUiain  iiiatrevn,  vii. 


118  INTRODUCTION   TO 

command  the  commerce  between  the  East  and  the  West,  became, 
under  Ptolemy  Soter,  renowned  for  literature  and  science.  This 
enterprising  ruler  founded  the  famous  Alexandrian  Library,  and 
collected  for  it  the  accessible  literature  of  all  nations.  Thitlier  he 
Alexandrian  invited  philosophers  and  learned  men  from  all  lands, 
culture.  and  the  new  city  became  rapidly  filled  with  the  repre- 

sentatives of  all  schools  of  philosophy  and  the  devotees  of  all  relig- 
ions. Among  all  these  the  Greek  was  the  common  language  of 
intercourse,  and  was  sometimes  called  the  Macedonian,  but  more 
commonly  the  Alexandrine,  dialect. 

Meantime  the  Jews  had  become  largely  scattered  throughout 
the  Macedonian  Empire,  and,  dwelling  in  numerous  cities  where 
tlie  Greek  was  generally  spoken,  they  adopted  it  as  their  com- 
Aiexandrian  ^^^  language.  But  Alexandria  especially  contained 
Jews.  large  numbers  of  Jews.'     The  liberal  policy  of  the  first 

two  Ptolemies  (Soter  and  Philadelphus)  invited  them  thither,  and 
their  commercial  tastes  and  tact  found  there  peculiar  attractions. 
According  to  well-known  tradition,  the  Septuagint  version  of  the 
Old  Testament  was  made  by  the  direction  of  one  of  these  kings. 
Internal  evidence,  however,  shows  that  this  version  was  made  at 
different  times  and  by  different  persons  during  the  three  centuries 
preceding  the  Christian  era.  As  the  Jewish  exiles  at  Babylon 
lost  by  degrees  the  use  of  Hebrew,  and  adopted  the  tongue  of 
the  Chaldeans,  so  the  Jews  of  the  dispersion,  living  in  Greek 
cities,  adopted  the  Greek,  and  required  to  have  their  Scriptures 
translated  into  the   same  language.      These  Greek-speaking  Jews 

were  called  Hellenists,  and  since  the  beginning  of  the 
Hellenists.  ,  .     ,         ,  ^  ^^     , 

seventeenth  century  it  has  been  customary  to  call  the 

later  Greek  dialect,  as  used  by  Jews,  the  Hellenistic  Greek.  On 
the  common  language  of  these  Greek-speaking  Israelites,  or  Hellen- 
ists, the  use  of  the  Se})tuagint  version  of  the  Old  Testament  would 
necessarily  exert  a  moulding  influence.  The  speech  of  all  Hellen- 
ists, whether  of  Alexand^ia,  or  Tarsus,  or  Antioch,  or  Corinth, 
would  acquire  a  certain  peculiarity  of  style,  a  kind  of  ethnic 
tinge.  The  Greek  translators  of  the  Old  Testament  transferred 
many  Hebrew  idioms  into  their  version,  and  found  it  necessary  to 
employ  Greek  words  to  express  ideas  entirely  new  and  foreign  to 
the  Greek  mind.  Hebraic  forms  of  speech  would  thus  become  com- 
mon among  the  Hellenists,  and  differentiate  them  from  other  Greek- 
speaking  peoples, 

'  According  to  Philo  (Treatise  against  Flaccus,  sections  vi  and  viii)  they  numbered 
n  million  of  men  in  all  Egypt,  and  constituted  about  two  filths  of  the  entire  popula- 
tion of  Alexandria. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  119 

When  Christianity  introduced  a  new  life  and  religion  into  the 
world,  its  sacred  books  were  all  written  by  Jews  or  Jewish  pros- 
elytes, who  used  the  later  Hebraic  or  Hellenistic  Greek.  These 
writers  found  it  necessary  again  to  use  this  lansfuage   _,  . ., 

•>       o  so       Christian   ide- 

for  the  setting  forth  of  ideas  and  truths  which  had  as  influencinjr 
never  before  been  clothed  in  any  human  language.  ^^^^^  speech. 
New  significations  thus  became  attached  to  old  words,  and  new 
forms  of  speech  were  coined  to  express  the  concepts  of  the  Gospel. 
Accordingly,  the  New  Testament  language  and  diction  have,  neces- 
sarily, peculiarities  of  their  own. 

There  is,  happily,  no  occasion  now  to  repeat  or  continue  the  old 
controversy  between  the  Purists  and  the  Hebraists  touching  the 
character  of  the  New  Testament  Greek.  The  Purists,  controversy  be- 
in  claiming  for  it  all  the  classic  purity  and  elegance  of  !^'^6"  J'Jf  P"!"- 

o  1  J  &  ists  and  the  He- 

the  ancient  Greek,  seem  to  have  been  actuated  by  the  braists. 
same  principle  as  those  who  contended  for  the  inspiration  of  the  He- 
brew vowel-points.  To  them  it  seemed  also  a  disparagement  of  the 
holy  books  to  say  that  they  wei'e  written  in  a  corrupted  dialect,  or 
one  less  pure  and  perfect  than  any  Grecian  models.  On  the  other 
hand,  some  of  the  Hebraists  went  to  the  extreme  of  charging  bar- 
barisms and  manifold  inaccuracies  upon  the  language  of  the  New 
Testament  writers.  Comparative  philology,  and  more  thorough 
linguistic  research,  have  rendered  the  old  controversies  obsolete, 
and  it  is  now  seen,  in  the  light  of  history  and  of  the  science  of 
language,  how  and  why  the  Hellenistic  Greek  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment differs  from  the  older  classic  tongue.' 

'  So  early  as  the  latter  part  of  the  sixteenth  century,  Beza  (De  dono  Linguae,  etc., 
on  Acts  X,  46)  acknowledged  the  Hebraisms  of  the  New  Testament,  but  extolled  them 
as  being  'of  such  a  nature  that  in  no  other  idiom  could  expressions  be  so  happily 
formed;  nay,  in  some  cases  not  even  formed  at  all"  in  an  adequate  manner.  He  con- 
sidered them  as  "gems  with  which  [the  apostles]  had  adorned  their  writings."  The 
famous  Robert  Stephens  (Pref.  to  his  N.  Test.,  1576)  declared  strongly  against  those, 
"  qui  in  his  scriptis  [sacris]  inculta  omnia  et  horrida  esse  putant ; "  and  he  laboured 
not  only  to  show  that  the  New  Testament  contains  many  of  the  elegancies  of  the  true 
Grecian  style,  but  that  even  its  Hebraisms  give  inimitable  strength  and  energy  to  its 
diction.  Thus  far,  then,  Hebraism  was  not  denied  but  vindicated;  and  it  was  only 
against  allowing  an  excess  of  it,  and  against  alleged  incorrectnesses  and  barbarisms, 
that  Beza  and  Stephens  contended. 

Sebastian  Pfochen  (Diatribe  de  Ling.  Graec.  N.  Test,  puritate,  1C29)  first  laboured 
in  earnest  to  show  that  all  the  expressions  employed  in  the  New  Testament  are  found 
in  good  classic  Greek  authors.  In  1658,  Erasmus  Schmidt  vindicated  the  same  ground. 
But  before  this,  J.  Junge,  rector  at  Hamburg,  published  (in  1637,  1689)  his  opinion 
in  favour  of  the  purity  (not  the  classic  elegance)  of  the  New  Testament  diction;  which 
opinion  was  vindicated  by  Jac.  Grosse,  pastor  in  the  same  city,  in  a  series  of  five 
essays  published  in  1640  and  several  successive  years.  The  last  four  of  these  were 
directed  against  the  attacks  of  opponents,  i.  e.,  of  advocates  for  the  Hellenistic  diction 


120  INTRODUCTION   TO 

The   sources  from  which  we   are  to  learn  the   peculiarities  of 

.  .      the   later  Greek  are  the   writers  of   the   Alexandrine 

Sources  of  in-  , 

formation  and  and  Roman  periods  of  Greek  literature,  but  more  espe- 
^^^^y-  cially  the  grammarians,  scholiasts,  and  lexicographers, 

who  have  expressly  treated  of  the  diiierences  between  Attic  ele- 
gance and  the  corruj^tions  of  the  later  Greek.  But  the  great 
monuments  of  the  Hellenistic  Greek  are  the  Septuagint  version  of 
the  Old  Testament,  the  apocryphal  books,  and  the  scriptures  of  the 
New  Testament.  The  writings  of  Philo  Judteus,  Josephus,  the 
Apostolical  Fathers,  and  sundry  writers  of  the  later  Roman  period, 
have  also  a  value  in  this  connexion;  but  the  New  Testament  itself 
must  furnish  the  principal  illustrations  for  the  purpose  of  the  bibli- 
cal interpreter.  It  is  of  the  first  importance  for  us  to  remember 
that  the  New  Testament  writers  learned  their  Greek  not  from 
books,  but  from  the  language  of  common  life.  There  is  no  suffi- 
cient reason  for  believing  that  any  of  the  Evangelists  or  Apostles 
were  extensively  familiar  with  Greek  literature;  not  even  Paul, 
who,  indeed,  quotes  from  Greek  writers  (Acts  xvii,  28;  Titus  i,  12), 

of  the  New  Testament;  viz.,  against  Dan.  Wulfer's  Innocentia  Hellenist,  vindicata 
(IGIO),  and  an  essay  of  the  like  nature  by  J.  Musoeus  of  Jena  (lC-11,  1612). 

Independently  of  this  particular  contest,  D.  Ileinsius  (in  1C43)  declared  himself  in 
favour  of  Hellenism;  as  also  Thos.  Gataker  (164S),  who  avowedly  wrote  in  oppositioa 
to  Pfochen,  with  much  learning,  but  rather  an  excessive  leaning  to  Hebraism.  Joh. 
Vorstius  (1658,  16G.5)  wrote  a  book  on  Hebrai.-nis,  which  is  still  common.  On  some 
excesses  in  this  book  Horace  Vitringa  made  some  brief  but  pithy  remarks.  Some- 
what earlier  than  these  last  wi'itings,  J.  H.  Boeder  (1041)  published  remarks,  in  which 
he  took  a  kind  of  middle  way  between  the  two  parties;  as  did  J.  Olcarius  (1G68),  and 
J.  Leusden  about  the  same  time.  It  was  about  this  time,  also,  that  the  majority  of 
critical  writers  began  to  acknowledge  a  Hebrew  element  in  the  New  Testament  diction, 
which,  however,  they  did  not  regard  as  constituting  hnrhnrhm,  but  only  as  giving  an 
oriental  hue  to  the  diction.  M.  Solanus,  in  an  able  essay  directed  against  the  tract  of 
Pfochen,  vindicated  this  position.  J.  H.  Michaelis  (1707),  and  A.  Blackwall  (Sacred 
Classics,  1727),  did  not  venture  to  deny  the  Hebraisms  of  the  New  Testament,  but 
aimed  principally  to  show  that  the.se  did  not  detract  from  the  qualities  of  a  good  and 
elegant  style ;  so  that,  in  this  respect,  the  New  Testament  writers  were  not  inferior  to 
the  classical  ones.  The  work  of  the  latter  abounds  with  so  many  excellent  remarks, 
that  it  is  worthy  of  attention  from  every  critical  reader,  oven  of  the  jircsont  time. 

In  1722,  Siegm.  Georgi,  in  his  Vindiciae,  etc.,  and  in  17"):>  in  his  Hiurocriticus  Sacer, 
vindicated  anew  the  old  views  of  the  Purists;  but  without  changing  the  tide  of 
opinion.  The  same  design  J.  C.  Schwartz  had  in  view  in  his  Conmi.  crit.  et  philol. 
in  Ling.  Graec.  (1G30);  who  was  followed,  in  1752,  by  E.  Palairct  (Observ.  philol.  crit. 
in  N.  Test.),  the  last,  I  believe,  of  all  the  Purists. 

Most  of  the  earlier  dissertations  above  named,  with  some  others,  were  published 
together  in  a  volume  by  J.  Rhenford,  entitled  Dissert.itionuin  jihilol.  thool.  <lc  Stylo 
N.  Test.  Syntagma,  17<i2 ;  and  the  later  ones  by  T.  H.  Vau  dcu  Iloncrt,  in  his  Syntagma 
Dissertatt.  de  Stylo  N.  Test.  Graeco,  1703.  Stuart,  Grammar  of  the  New  Testament 
Dialect,  pp.  8,  9.     Andover,  1841. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  121 

for  such  passages  as  he  cites  were  of  a  kind  that  would  naturally 
be  current  among  the  people. 

Planck,  in  his  valuable  Dissertation  on  the  true  nature  and  char- 
acter of  the  Greek  Style  of  the  New  Testament/  classi-   pecuiiaiities 
fies  its  chief  peculiarities  and  characteristics  under  eio-ht   ?'^?  chrrLctcr- 

^  .  .  _  *  istics    or    Hel- 

heads,  which,  in  the  main,  we  follow,  though  drawing  lenisiic  Greek. 
our  illustrations  from  many  other  sources. 

1.  Words  adopted  into  the  Greek  language  from  foreign  sources. 
Here  belong  the  Aramaic  words  already  noticed;  such 

as  Abba,  Mphphatha,  Gorban,  Aceldama  /  names  of  Ro- 
man coins;  as  drjvdgtov,  Latin  denarius;  KoSgdvrrig,  2i  farthinr/,  from 
the  Latin  quadrans ;  TTgairojgiov,  Latin  j^'^''^^  to  Hum  (John  xviii,  28); 
(peX6v7]g,  written  also  (paiXovi-jg,  (peX6)V7]q,  and  (jyaOMvrjg  (2  Tim.  iv,  13,) 
corrupt  form  of  (fyatvoXrjg,  from  the  Latin  pcenula,  a  cloak. 

2.  Words  peculiar  in  their  orthography  and  pronunciation.  The 
New  Testament  writers  did  not  follow  any  common  peculiar  or- 
standard  of  orthography.  Peter,  John,  Paul,  and  James  thogmpiiy. 
had  each  his  peculiar  method  of  spelling  certain  words,  and  proba- 
bly transcribers  of  their  manuscripts  used  still  a  different  method, 
according  to  the  custom  of  later  times.  In  this  respect  the  most 
ancient  manuscripts  exhibit  variations.  Alexandrian  copies  differ 
in  orthography  from  those  of  Constantinople,  and  the  writers  or 
transcribers  seem  in  many  instances  to  have  been  governed  by  a 
preference  for  certain  dialectic- forms;  as  derog,  eagle  (Matt,  xxiv, 
2S),  an  Attic  form  for  alerdg;  vaXog,  glass  (Rev.  xxi,  18),  instead 
of  veXog;  'iletog,  merciful  (Ileb.  viii,  12),  instead  of  IXaog.  Doric 
orthography  is  seen  in  rad^ij),  to  arrest  (John  vii,  30),  instead  of 
mei^'w  ;  KXiiSavog,  oven  (Luke  xii,  28),  instead  of  Kpifiavog;  Ionic,  in 
(^adiiog,  grade  or  degree  (1  Tim.  iii,  13),  for  [3aciwg;  trgrivfig,  Jieadlong 
(Acts  i,  18),  for  ngav7'jg. 

3.  Peculiarities  in  the  flexion  of  nouns  and  verbs.  The  form 
'AttoA/Lo)  is  used  for  the  accusative  (Acts  xix,  1),  and  ^jg^jQ^  ^j 
the  genitive  (1  Cor.  i,  12);  the  accusative  vyii],  sound,  nouns  and 
whole  (John  v,  11,  15;  Titus  ii,  8),  instead  of  the  more  '^^^^^' 
usual  form  vyid/  d(pievTai,  or  dtpeojvTai,  are  forgiven  (Matt. 
ix,  2,  5;  Luke  v,  20;  1  John  ii,  12),  is  used  instead  of  d(*)EivraL; 
icd-dov,  sit  thoic  (Matt,  xxii,  44;  James  ii,  3),  instead  of  Kadtjao,  and 
Kdi9^,  thou  sittest  (Acts  xxiii,  3),  instead  of  Kd-^rjaai.     We  have  also 

'  Commentatio  de  vera  Natura  atque  Indole  Orationis  Graecae  Novi  Testament!,  by 
Henry  Planck,  Prof,  in  the  University  of  Gottinsen.  This  very  important  essay  was 
first  published  in  1810,  and  was  afterward  republi.-^lied  in  Rosenmiiller's  Comnienta- 
tiones  Theologicae,  1825.  It  was  translated  into  English  by  E.  Robinson,  and  pub- 
lished in  the  American  Biblieal  Repository,  Andover,  Oct.,  1831. 


123  INTRODUCTIOx\   TO 

tlie  termination  av  for  aai,  as  eyvw/cav  for  eyvo)Kaoi,  they  have  known 
(John  xvii,  V),  and  the  insertion  of  the  syllable  oa  in  the  third  person 
plural  of  some  words,  as  kdoXiovaav  for  kdoXiovv,  tJiey  deceived 
(Rom.  iii,  13).' 

4.  The  heterogeneous  use  of  nouns.  Thus  OKorog,  darkness  is 
Heterogeneous  "sed  in  the  masculine  and  neuter  genders;  Xi^og,  fam- 
nouiis.  ijie,  and  (Bdrog,  bramble,  in  masculine  and  feminine. 
We  have  the  neuter  plural  in  rd  Seoixd,  the  bands  (Luke  viii,  29), 
and  the  masculine  plural  rovg  deofxovg  (Phil,  i,  13),  and  tXeog,  mercy, 
which  is  used  as  masculine  by  all  classic  Greek  writers,  is  used  as 
neuter  in  the  Septuagint  and  in  the  New  Testament.  Compare 
Luke  i,  50,  58;  Rom.  ix,  23;  Jude  21,  and  (Septuagint)  Gen.  xix, 
19;  Num.  xi,  15. 

5.  Peculiar  forms  of  words,  which  passed  down  from  ancient 
Neworpecuiiar  dialects  into  the  common  language,  or  else  were  coined 
forms  of  words,  anew  according  to  some  ^jrevious  analogy.  Of  this 
class  we  have  (1)  among  Nouns:  dXeKrcop,  a  cock,  a  Doric  or  poetic 
form  for  dXeKTQvo)i',  OKorla,  darkness  (Matt,  x,  27;  John  A'i,  17),  for 
OKOToq;  olKodoiirj,  building  (1  Cor.  iii,  9;  xiv,  5;  Eph.  ii,  21),  for 
olfcodonrjua;  neromeaia,  exile  (Matt,  i,  11),  for  iieroiKia,  or  ne~oiKT]aig', 
fiad^irpia,  a  female  disciple  (Acts  ix,  36),  for  fj,a^rjrQig;  KardXvfia,  a 
lodginy  place  (Luke  ii,  7),  for  KaTaycjyiov;  al-rjua,  a  request  (Phil, 
iv,  6),  for  aLT7]atg',  and  many  other  nouns  ending  in  [.La,  for  Avhich  the 
more  classic  language  used  the  endings  t],  eia,  and  oig.  (2)  Among 
Verbs  we  find  a  tendency  to  jjrefer  the  ending  oco,  as  dvaKacvoo),  to 
reneio  {2  Cov.  iv,  10;  Col.  iii,  10),  instead  of  dvuKatvi^u);  KQaraioo), 
to  become  strong  (Luke  i,  80;  ii,  40;  Eph.  iii,  16),  instead  of  KQarvvu); 
oagou),  to  sioeep  (Luke  xv,  8),  instead  of  oaipo)',  SeKaroG)  to  tithe 
(Heb.  vii,  6,  9),  instead  of  6eKarevG).  Other  Hellenistic  forms  are 
OQdQiCo),  to  do  anything  early  in  the  morning  (Luke  xxi,  38),  insteac 
of  b^dQEvoi;  dA?/t9a),  to  grind  (Matt,  xxiv,  41),  instead  of  dAew; 
vridix),  to  spin  (Matt,  vi,  28),  instead  of  vew.  (3)  Among  Adjec- 
tives we  have  diTeiQaaroc,  not  temptable  (James  i,  13)  for  dTTeiQarog; 
dfiaQTcoXog,  sinful  (Luke  v,  8,  and  often),  for  dfiaQrrjXog;  dpdQivog, 
early  (Luke  xxiv,  22,  and  Text.  Rec.  of  Rev.  xxii,  16),  for  oQdpiog; 
and  (4)  among  ApvKnns,  li^aTriva,  stiddenly  (Mark  ix,  8),  for  k^a-n- 
ivT]g;  -navoinL,  tcith  all  om-'s  house  (Acts  xvi,  34),  for  navoLKia,  or 
TravoiKrjaia. 

6.  AVords  either  peculiar  to  the  ancient  dialects,  or  altogether 
oifi  dialects  new.  Of  the  former  class  are  eKxpoifia,  an  abortion 
andnewwords.  (j  Qq^,  xv,  8),  an  lonic  word,  for  which  the  Attics  used 
dju/3/la)jua,  or  ^|djLt/3Awjua;  and  yoyyvsw,  to  murmur  (John  vii,  32), 

'  See  many  other  rare  forms  in  Winer's  Grammar,  §§  13,  14. 


BIBLICAL   IIERMENEUTICS.  123 

and  yoyyvajid^,  murmuring  (John  vii,  12;  Acts  vi,  1),  Ionic  words 
for  which  the  Attics  employed  rov-&Qv^i.}  and  Tov6pvo[j,6g.  New 
words  were  coined  to  express  things  which  were  unknown  to  the 
ancient  Greeks,  and  peculiar  to  the  Jews  or  the  New  Testament 
writers;  as  dvdpunrdpeoKog,  a  tnan-pleaser  (Eph.  vi,  6;  Col.  iii,  22), 
aXXorpioeniaKonog,  an  overseer  of  other  people's  matters  (1  Peter 
iv,  15),  a();^i(7i'vdyw-yo(;',  ruler  of  the  synagogue  (Mark  v,  35),  sMwAo- 
XaTQtia,  idol-ioorship  (1  Cor,  x,  14;  Gal.  v,  20),  ScodeKacpvXov,  the 
Ijevple  of  the  twelve  tribes  (Acts  xxvi,  7).  Compare  also  the  lexicons 
on  dvvaiioo),  and  evSvvaixoo),  to  strengthen,  and  (ieftrjlooi^  to  profane. 

7.  A  notable  feature  of  the  New  Testament  dialect  consists  in 
the  new  siofnifications  given  to  words.     To  trace  such 

,.„        .  -  New  sipnlflca- 

clianges  and  modifications  of  meaning,  and  unfold  the  tions  given  to 
development  of  biblical  ideas,  is  the  most  difficult  and  '^'^^'^^• 
delicate  task  of  the  New  Testament  lexicographer.  He  must  do 
more  than  treat  the  varying  forms  of  words;  he  must  expound  the 
history  of  thought,  and  thus  become,  in  the  fullest  sense,  an  exegete,* 
An  instance  of  a  word  acquiring  a  new  signification  may  be  seen 
in  evayyeXcov,  used  in  the  ancient  classic  authors  in  the  sense  of 
reioard  for  good  news  given  to  the  messenger;  in  Isocrates  and 
Xenophon  it  is  used  of  sacrifice  for  a  good  message  y  and  still  later 
it  came  to  signify  the  good  message  itself  Thence  it  acquired  in 
the  New  Testament  the  special  sense  of  the  good  news  of  salvation 
in  Jesus  Christ.  So,  too,  the  word  TrapanaXeo)  was  used  in  the  an- 
cient Greek  as  meaning  to  call  to,  to  call  unto  an  assembly,  or  to 
invite  to  an  entertainment.  But  in  the  New  Testament  we  find  it 
used  for  begging,  conforting,  and  exhorting.  The  word  eIqtjvt], 
peace,  quiet,  as  contrasted  with  war  and  commotion,  easily  came  to 
be  used  of  peace  of  mind,  tranquillity.  Then,  in  the  Septuagint  and 
New  Testament  it  took  up  and  embodied  the  idea  of  icell-heing, 
v^elfare,  as  represented  in  the  Hebrew  Di^C*,  and  in  connection  with 
X^Qiq  and  eXeoq,  grace  and  mercy,  as  in  the  salutation  of  the  apos- 
tolical epistles,  denotes  the  blessed  state  of  soul-rest  obtained  by 
remission  of  sin  through  Jesus  Christ.  So  peace  with  God,  in  Rom. 
v,  1,  is  the  new  and  happy  relationship  between  God  and  man 
obtained  through  faith  in  the  atonement  of  Christ.^ 

'  Xo  morlern  writer  has  done  a  greater  service  in  this  department  than  Dr.  Hermann 
Cremer,  whose  Biblico-Theological  Lexicon  of  New  Testament  Greek  is  a  rare  monu- 
ment of  learning  and  critical  research,  and  indispensable  to  the  herraeneutics  of  the 
Christian  Scriptures.  For  extensive  illustration  of  New  Testament  words  in  their 
depth  and  fulness  of  meaning,  see  this  Lexicon  on  the  words  /SaTTTi'^w,  ovofxa,  ovpavoc, 
'jrityric,  uyioc,  fie-avoii,),  Koa/ioc,  raTzeivoc,  uyaTTuu),  and  uyuTTT;. 

^  A  like  development  or  modification  of  meaning  may  be  traced  in  the  words  anoKpi- 
vo,  avaTTiTTTcj,  avaKEHiai,  evxapiareu,  nrufia,  etc. 


124  INTRODUCTION   TO 

"It  would  have  been  impossible,"  observes  Bleek,'  "to  give  ex- 
pression to  all  the  religious  conceptions  and  Christian  ideas  of  the 
New  Testament,  had  the  writers  strictly  confined  themselves  to  the 
words  and  phrases  in  use  among  the  Greeks,  and  with  the  significa- 
tions usually  attached  to  them.  These  Christian  ideas  were  quite 
unknown  to  the  Greeks,  and  they  had  never  formed  phrases  suitable 
to  give  expression  to  them.  On  the  other  hand,  most  of  these 
ideas  and  conceptions  already  existed  in  germ  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  Avere  more  or  less  familiar  to  the  Jews  by  means  of  ap- 
propriate designations.  Hence  they  would  be  best  expressed  for 
Greek-speaking  Jews  in  the  words  by  which  they  had  been  ren- 
dered in  the  Septuagint.  These  expressions  would  naturally  be 
chosen  and  spread  by  those  teachers  who  were  of  Jewish  extraction 
and  education,  and  would,  of  course,  be  adopted  generally  to  denote 
Christian  ideas.  Many  of  these  expressions  had  been  ordinary  Greek 
words,  Avhose  meanings  had  been  made  fuller  and  higher  when 
applied  among  the  Jews  to  religious  subjects,  and  which  retained 
tliese  meanings  when  adopted  by  the  Christian  Church,  or  were 
again  modified  and  further  elevated,  just  as  the  ideas  and  conceptions 
of  the  Old  Testament  revelation  were  modified  and  elevated  by 
Christianity.  Hence  it  frequently  came  to  pass,  that  when  a  Greek 
word  in  its  ordinary  signification  corresponded  with  a  Hebrew  or 
Aramean  word,  the  derived  and  developed  meanings  attaching  to  the 
latter  would  be  transferred  to  the  former,  and  the  Greek  word  would 
be  used  in  the  higher  sense  of  the  Hebrew  or  Aramean  woi'd,  al- 
though this  meaning  had  before  been  unknown  to  Greek  usage."' 

8.  it  remains  for  us  to  notice  more  especially  the  Hebraisms  of 

the  New  Testament  lauffuaofe,  that  transfer  of  Hebrew 
Hcbrciisms  ^   ~ 

idioms  and  forms  of  expression  into  Greek,  which  Attic 

purity  and  taste  would  at  once  pronounce  corruptions  or  barbarisms. 

Winer  has  shown  that  most  of  the  older  writers  on  this  subject  have 

included  in  their  list  of  Hebraisms  many  expressions  which  arc  not 

unknown  to  the  Greek  prose  writers,  or  are  the  common  property 

of  many  languages.    He  distinguishes  two  kinds  of  Hebraisms  in  the 

New  Testament,  the  perfect  and  the  imperfect.     Perfect  Hebraisms 

include  those  words,  phrases,  and  constructions  which  are  strictly 

l^eculiar  to  the  Hebrew  or  Aramean,  and  were  transferred  directly 

thence  into  the  Hellenistic  idiom.     Imperfect  Hebraisms  are  all 

those  words,  phrases,  and  constructions,  which,  though  found  in 

'  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament.     Eng.  translation,  by  Urwick  ;  pp.  72,  73. 

'  See  abundant  illustration  of  this  in  such  words  as  XpKrrof,  Christ ;  rrvevfia,  spir- 
it; X6yn(;^  word;  auTripia,  salvation  ;  airu'Xeia,  destruction  ;  KKrjTog,  called;  iKK?^Tia(a, 
church  ;  diKaioavftj,  riffhtcoitsness. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  125 

Greek  prose  writers,  have  been  in  all  probability  introduced  direct- 
ly from  the  Hebrew.' 

(a)  Not  only  were  Hebrew  or  Aramaic  words  literally  adopted 
into  the  New  Testament  Greek  (like  'Aj3/3a,  Ar.  NUN', 

Father,   Mark   xiv,   86,    Rom.   viii,    15 ;   i^oavvd,    Heb.         ^°'^*^" 
NrnrL*'in,  Hoscmna,  save  noic,  John  xii,  13  ;  lardv,  Heb.  \l^V,  /Satan, 
2  Cor.  xii,  7 ;  aUspa,  Heb.  13'^,  strouff  drink,  Luke  i,  15),  but  Greek 
words  were  made  to  represent  distinctively  Hebrew  conceptions; 
as  p7][J.a,  word,  in  the  broad  and  indefinite  sense  of  the  Heb.  "in'l. 

•  T     T* 

thi>i(/,  matter,  aj^air.  So  in  Luke  ii,  15:  ro  pqfxa  tovto  to  yeyovog, 
this  thing  that  has  come  to  pass.  The  Greek  word  c-rrXdyxva,  botcels, 
takes,  in  the  New  Testament,  the  sense  of  tender  affection,  sympathy; 
from  the  common  usage  of  the  Heb.  D''pn"i.  Hence  the  verbal  form 
GrXay'xyiil,o[iai,  to  have  compassion. 

(b)  Then  there  are  numerous  forms  of  expression  which  are 
traceable  directly  to  the  Hebrew;  as  ^rjrelv  Tr]v  ipvxrjv,  p-orms  of  ex- 
Heb.  ti'^r^^  ^1?^,  to  seek  the  life  of  any  one  (Matt,  ii,  20  ;  pression. 
Rom.  xi,  3) ;  Xaii(idveLv  ttqooojttov,  Heb.  Q"'JS  NC'J,  to  accept  the 
person,  that  is,  to  lift  his  face,  or  show  partiality  (Luke  xx,  21;  Gal. 
ii,  6) ;  rideadai  kv  rr}  KapSia,  Heb.  3p3  DIK',  to  p>lcice  or  lay  tqy  in  the 
heart  (Luke  i,  66;  xxi,  14;  Acts  v^  4);  arofia  fxaxciiQag,  Heb.  3"!n"*5, 
mouth  of  the  sword  (Luke  xxi,  24;  Heb.  xi,  34);  Kal  eyevero  very 
frequently  for  "n^l,  a7id  it  came  to  pass. 

(c)  The  New  Testament  Greek  has  also  appi'opriated  sundry  gram- 
matical constructions  peculiar  to  the  Hebrew.  (1)  Many  Grammatical 
verbs  are  followed  by  prepositions  governing  the  ac-  constructions. 
cusative  or  dative,  where,  in  classic  Greek,  the  verbs  alone  govern 
Avithout  a  preposition.  Compare  the  New  Testament  use  of  the 
words  TTpoGKvvecx),  to  worship;  cfyevycj),  to  flee;  bjinXoyeu),  to  confess. 
(2)  The  particle  el  is  used  in  expressing  a  negative  oath  after  the 
form  of  the  Hebrew  DX,  if  "I  swore  in  my  wrath  if  they  shall 
enter  into  my  rest"  (Heb.  iii,  11).  That  is,  they  shall  not  enter. 
Compare  Mark  viii,  12.  (3)  The  verb  Trpoorldrjju  is  used,  like  the 
He])rew  flD^,  with  another  verb,  to  denote  additional  action:  "He 
added  to  send  another  servant'^  (Luke  xx,  11).  "He  added  (i.  e., 
proceeded)  to  take  Peter  also"  (Acts  xii,  3).  (4)  An  imitation  of 
the  Hebrew  infinitive  absolute  is  apparent  in  Luke  xxii,  15:  emi^f/im 
em-&viirjaa,  "with  desire  I  desired  to  eat  this  passoA^er."  That  is, 
I  longingly,  or  earnestly,  desired.  John  iii,  29 :  %apa  ;t^tp£^  "  with 
joy  he  rejoices;"  he  greatly  rejoices.  Acts  iv,  17:  d~F.tX'^  dirnXiiGO)- 
IJ-sda,  "  with  threatening  let  us  threaten  them."  (5)  In  Rev.  vii,  2 
we  note  the  pleonastic  use  of  the  pronoun  in  imitation  of  a  "VAell- 

'  See  Winer,  Grammar  of  the  Idiom  of  the  New  Testament,  §  3. 


126  INTRODUCTION   TO 

known  use  of  the  Ileb.  "iti'X :  olg  edodi]  avrolg,  '■'■to  whom  it  "was  given 
to  them.  Compare  also  the  adverbial  relative  in  Rev.  xii,  14:  o-r:ov 
TgE(f)eTat  eKel,  '■'■  xohere  she  is  nourished  <Aere,"^Heb.  D'cJ*  •  •  •  "i*J'X. 
(6)  The  Hebrew  use  of  nouns  in  the  genitive  as  substitutes  for  the 
kindred  adjective  is  very  common :  as,  Xbyoi  rrjg  ;^;dpfT05',  tcords  of 
grace,  for  gracious  loords  (Luke  iv,  22);  OKsvog  eKXoyrjg,  vessel  of 
choice,  for  chosen  vessel  (Acts  ix,  15);  "the  power  of  his  might,"  for 
his  mighty  power  (Eph.  i,  19);  steicard  of  unrighteousness  and 
Mammon  of  unrighteousness  (Luke  xvi,  8,  9),  for  unrighteous  stew- 
ard and  unrighteous  Mammon;  and  judge  of  unrighteousness  (Luke 
xviii,  6),  for  unrighteous  judge.  Sometimes  these  genitive  forms 
yield  a  profound  significance,  as  in  Eph.  i,  18:  "The  riches  of  the 
glory  of  his  inheritance  in  the  saints,"  where  it  would  take  much 
from  the  force  of  the  expression  to  say,  "  His  rich  and  glorious  in- 
heritance," or  "  His  gloriously  rich  inheritance." 

The  New  Testament  Greek  has  also  some  peculiarities  of  syntax, 
of  which,  however,  it  is  unnecessary  here  to  treat.  The  Hellenistic 
writers  naturally  preferred  short  sentences,  after  the  manner  of  the 
Hebrew.     But  every  student  will  observe  the  differences  of  style 

„   .  ,.     ,  ,  ,     amonof  the  New  Testament  writers.    The  Pauline  epis- 

Vanoties  of  style  »  '■ 

in  New  Testa-  tlos  exhibit  a  more  involved  and  polemic  style  tlian 
ment  writers.      ^^^^^  ^^j^^^.  poi-tio^^  ^f  the  Christian  Scriptures.     But 

these  differ  noticeably  among  themselves.  The  Thessalonian  epis- 
tles have  a  natural  and  easy  flow,  but  the  prophetic  portions,  espe- 
cially 2  Thcss.  ii,  have  peculiarities  of  their  own.  In  the  Epistles 
to  the  Romans  and  Galatians  we  notice  the  marked  argumentative 
stvle  as  contrasted  with  the  more  familiar  tone  and  didactic  straight- 
forwardness  of  the  pastoral  epistles.  The  Corinthian  epistles  have 
an  air  of  freedom  and  authority  which  is  not  so  apparent  in  Ephe- 
sians,  Philippians,  and  Colossians,  the  epistles  of  Paul's  imprison- 
ment, llie  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  written  in  a  purer  Greek, 
and  has  a  beauty  and  flow  of  style  quite  in  advance  of  the  epistles 
acknowledged  to  be  Pauline.  The  Epistle  of  James  is  noted  for 
the  exceptional  purity  and  elegance  of  its  language,  and  Luke, 
"the  beloved  physician,"  who  was  probably  not  a  Jew  by  birth 
(Col.  iv,  11,  comp.  verse  14),  writes  a  more  classic  Greek  than  any 
other  of  the  evangelists.  The  Gospel  and  Epistles  of  John  have 
numerous  peculiarities  of  diction ;  simple  and  childlike  forms  of 
expressing  most  eleva4^ed  and  profound  spiritual  conceptions ;  but 
the  Apocalypse  is  the  most  Hebraistic  in  thought  and  language  of 
all  the  New  Testament  books.' 

'  On  the  linguistic  peculiarities  of  the  different  Now  Testament  writers,  comp.  Im- 
mer,  Hermeneutics  of  the  New  Testament,  pp.  132-144. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  127 

It  will  not  be  difficult  for  any  one  to  perceive  that  Hellenistic 
writers,  familiar  with  the  prophetic  language  of  the  Old  Testament, 
would  be  likely  to  transfer  its  bold  and  vivid  imagery  into  their 
Greek,  especially  when  they  themselves  were  writing  prophecy. 
When  Isaiah  portrays  the  coming  doom  of  Babylon,  he  sees  all 
nature  in  convulsion.  "Behold,  the  day  of  Jehovah  comee,  cruel, 
and  Avrath,  and  burning  of  anger.  .  .  .  For  the  stars  of  the  heavens 
and  their  constellations  shall  not  shed  forth  their  lisrht:  dark  has 
the  sun  become  in  his  going  forth,  and  the  moon  will  not  cause  her 
light  to  shine"  (Isa.  xiii,  9,  10).  Compare  also  chap,  xxiv,  19-23; 
xxxiv,  1-10;  Nahum  i,  3-6.  The  celebrated  passage  in  Rom. 
viii,  19-23  is  truly  Hebraic  in  the  vividness  of  its  metaphorical  con- 
ceptions. The  whole  creation  is  represented  as  groaning,  hoping, 
willing,  and  looking  eagerly  for  the  revelation  {dnoKdXvtpiv)  of  the 
sons  of  God.  We  need  not  wonder,  therefore,  that  in  such  pro- 
phetic passages  as  the  twenty-fourth  of  Matthew,  and  the  Apoca- 
lypse of  John,  we  have  the  spirit  and  imagery  of  the  Old  Testament 
predictions  reproduced,  and  the  language  of  the  Greeks  employed 
in  forms  and  symbols  such  as  it  had  never  previously  used.  The 
Hebrew  spirit  of  prophecy  was  thus  inbreathed  into  Grecian  speech. 

If  there  may  be  seen  any  divine  purpose,  or  any  special  signifi- 
cance, in  the  use  of  the  Hebrew  and  Chaldee  tongues  to  Greek  the  most 
embody  the  Old  Testament  revelation,  there  Avas  also  a  suitable  lan- 
reason  for  clothing  the  Christian  revelation  in  the  Ian-  ctnTstianScrip- 
guage  of  the  Greeks.  The  Law  and  the  Prophets  were  ^'^^'■*^^- 
designed  especially  for  the  sons  of  Abraham,  a  chosen  and  peculiar 
peoj^le ;  but  the  New  Testament  revelation  w^as  for  the  world.  The 
miracle  of  tongues  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  was  prophetic,  indicat- 
ing that  the  new  word,  then  first  speaking  publicly  to  the  world, 
would  make  itself  heard  in  all  the  living  languages  of  men.  Par- 
thians  and  Medes  and  Elamites,  and  those  that  inhabi^red  Meso- 
potamia, Judea,  and  Cappadocia,  Pontus  and  Asia,  Phr3^gia  and 
Pamphylia,  Egypt  and  the  jjarts  of  Libya  about  Cyrene,  and  stran- 
gers of  Rome,  both  Jews  and  j^roselytes,  Cretes  and  Arabians 
(Acts  ii,  9-11)  heard  with  amazement  that  first  preaching  of  the 
Gospel,  for  they  heard  them  speaking  "  every  one  in  his  own  dia- 
lect" (elg  eKaarog  ry  ISla  ScaXeicTG),  ver.  6.)  These  Avere  all  devout 
Hellenists,  then  sojourning  in  Jerusalem  (ver.  5) ;  and  in  all  the 
provinces  of  the  empire  from  which  they  came  Greek  was  the  com- 
mon dialect.  Besides  their  own  vernacular,  these  Hellenists  under- 
stood and  spoke  the  language  of  the  Greeks.  What  more  fitting, 
then,  than  that  the  new  Gospel  should  embody  its  written  records 
in  this  most  nearly  perfect  and  universal  language  of  that  age? 


133  INTRODUCTION   TO 

"The  Jews  require  signs"  (a7)[xela),  observes  the  most  erudite 
writer  of  the  New  Testament,  "but  the  Greeks  seek  for  wisdom" 
{no(f)iav,  1  Cor.  i,  22).  As  if  to  meet  these  proclivities,  the  Okl 
Testament  has  been  set  forth  in  a  hieroglyphic  language  of  the 
early  world,  in  which  every  letter  is  a  sign  or  picture  of  something 
visible;  while  the  New  Testament  is  Avritten  in  the  historic  lan- 
guage of  rcsthetic  culture  and  philosophy.  The  tongue  of  the 
versatile  Hellenes  was  peculiarly  suited  to  express  and  preserve  for 
all  nations  the  Gospel  of  the  power  and  wisdom  of  God  (1  Cor, 
i,  24),  which  was  destined  to  overthrow  Judaism,  and  confoiind  the 
boasted  wisdom  of  the  world. 

We  may  well  believe,  then,  that  the  use  of  Hebrew,  Chaldee, 
and  Greek,  as  the  original  languages  of  the  Scriptures,  was  no  mere 
accident  of  history,  but  a  particular  providence,  grounded  in 
highest  wisdom.  The  fact  that  they  have  all  ceased  to  be  living 
languages  since  the  inspired  records  they  embody  came  to  be 
recognized  as  a  sacred  trust,  is  truly  significant.  The  means 
of  ascertainins:  and  illustrating  the  sense  of  these  records  are 
ample;  and  the  divine  oracles  thus  abide,  sanctified  and  set  apart 
in  well-known  foi'ms  of  speech  which  can  never  again  be  disturbed 
by  linguistic  changes  or  the  revolutions  of  empire.  The  Hebrew, 
like  the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  will  be  studied  as  a  wonder  of  the 
world.  The  temj^le's  great  and  costly  stones,  its  unique  architec- 
ture, and  divine  plan  and  purpose — in  all  essentials  a  copy  of  the 
pattern  shown  to  Moses  in  the  mount  of  God  (Exod.  xxv,  40) — 
held  notable  analogy  with  the  unique  and  expressive  forms  of  He- 
brew speech,  in  which  words  stand  forth  as  sacred  symbols,  aiid 
grammatical  constructions  are  made  to  suggest  profoundest  concep- 
tions of  the  holiness  of  God  and  the  redemption  of  mankind.  T]ie 
Chaldoe  chapters  of  Daniel  and  Ezra  are  like  the  monumental 
slabs  from  the  ruined  palaces  of  Babylonian  and  Persian  kings — 
imperishable  witnesses  that  God  once  spoke  to  those  mighty  na- 
tions, and,  when  they  were  in  highest  power  and  jDomp,  and  Israel 
in  exile  and  humiliation,  foretold  their  utter  ruin,  and  the  certain 
triumph  of  truth  and  righteousness  in  the  kingdom  of  the  God  of 
heaven.  The  Greek  lantruao;©,  like  the  famous  Parthenon  at 
Athens,  breathes  a  marvellous  expressiveness,  and  abounds  in  mod- 
els of  beauty.  But  in  its  Hellenistic  style  and  New  Testament 
form  we  admire  the  divine  wisdom,  the  deep  philosophy,  and  the 
practical  judgment,  which  a])propriated  the  common  dialect  of  a 
Avorld-wide  civilization,  and  consecrated  its  potent  formulas  of 
thought  to  preserve  and  perpetuate  the  Gospel. 


BIBLICAL    IIERMEXEUTIC&  129 


CHAPTER  VII. 

TEXTUAL    CRITICISM. 

Biblical  Criticism  is  a  term  which  has  often  been  applied  to  the 
critical  treatment  of  nearly  all  topics  that  come  xmder 
the  head  of  Bihlical  Introduction,  such  as  questions  of  lower  criti- 
the  date  and  authorship  of  the  sacred  books,  and  also  ^^^' 
of  interpretation  itself.  This  use  of  the  term  is  more  definitely 
known  as  the  Higher  Criticism.  The  other  and  more  proper  sense 
is  that  which  restricts  it  to  the  critical  labours  which  aim  to  restore 
the  original  texts  of  the  Bible.  This  usage  of  the  word  is  often 
called  the  Lower  Criticism,  It  treats  the  forms  and  order  in  which 
the  books  of  the  Bible  have  been  arranged,  the  history,  condition, 
and  relative  value  of  the  ancient  manuscript  copies,  and  the  differ- 
ent printed  editions  of  the  original  texts.  It  collates  and  compares 
ancient  manuscripts,  versions,  and  quotations,  and  lays  down  rules 
and  principles  by  which  to  detect  corruptions  and  determine  the 
genuine  reading. 

It  frequently  occurs  that  the  interpretation  of  a  passage  of  Scrip- 
ture is  so  far  involved  in  a  question  of  textual  criticism  The  interpreter 
that  the  critical  treatment  of  the  text  is  essential  to  the  ^T^l^i^^!°^^, 

a  c  o  m  p  e  t  e  n  t 

exposition.  Especially  is  this  true  in  the  case  of  texts  textual  criiic. 
so  doubtful  that  the  ablest  critics  differ  in  judgment  as  to  the  gen- 
uine reading.  An  exegete  who  proceeds  with  the  explanation  of 
such  a  doubtful  passage,  utterly  ignoring  or  indifferent  to  the  un- 
certainty of  the  text  itself,  exhibits  himself  as  an  untrustworthy 
guide.  The  competent  intei'preter  of  Scripture  is  supposed  to  be  _ 
thoroughly  versed  in  the  history  and  principles  of  textual  criti- 
cism, and  it  is  proper  that  in  this  Introduction  to  Biblical  Her- 
meneutics  we  dcA'ote  a  brief  chapter  to  this  subject.  Our  space 
and  the  purpose  of  this  volume  will  allow  us  only  to  present  the 
leading  j^rinciples  and  canons.' 

'  On  the  subject  of  Textual  Criticism  see  Davidson,  Biblical  Criticism  (2  vols.,  Edin- 
burgh, 1852),  and  Revision  of  the  Hebrew  Text  of  the  Old  Testament  (London,  1855) ; 
Strack,  Prolegomena  Critica  in  Vet.  Testamentum  Ilebraicum  (Lps.,  1873);  F.  II. 
Scrivener,  Plain  Introduction  to  the  Criticism  of  the  New  Testament  (Second  Ed., 
Cambridge,  18*74);  Home,  Introduction  to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  vol.  ii,  pp.  1-112  (Ayre 
&  Tregelles'  Ed.,  4  vols.,  Lond.,  18fi2);  Tregelles,  Account  of  the  Printed  Text  of  the 
9 


130  INTRODUCTION   TO 

In  all  ancient  writings  whicli  have  oome  down  to  us  in  a  great 
Causes  of  vari-  number  and  variety  of  manuscri]^ts,  we  find  a  multi- 
ous  readings,  t^jg  Qf  various  readings.  These  have  arisen  ^liainlj 
through  the  carelessness  of  transcribers:  but,  in  some  instances, 
perhaps,  through  design.  Copyists  accidentally  confounded  similar 
words,  and  sometimes  transposed,  repeated,  or  omitted  letters  and 
words.  Some  of  the  ancient  manuscripts  contained  marginal  notes, 
and  in  copying  from  these  the  glosses  were  incorporated  in  the 
text.  Sometimes  the  text  was  purposely  amended  by  a  scribe, 
who  thought  he  could  improve  it.  A  difficult  or  obscure  word  was 
exchanged  for  an  easy  one.  A  rough  passage  was  made  smooth, 
and  sometimes  a  difficult  clause  or  sentence  was  entirely  omitted. 
Sometimes  dogmatic  and  party  purposes  led  to  the  wilful  corrup- 
tion of  the  text.  Thus  originated  the  famous  interpolation  of  the 
three  witnesses  in  1  John  v,  7.  Sometimes  the  manuscripts  used  in 
translation  were  themselves  imperfect,  and  so  errors  would  be  likely 
to  multiply  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  manuscripts. 

The  sources  from  which  the  genuine  readings  are  to  be  deter- 
mined   are    mainly   ancient    manuscripts,   ancient  ver- 

SourcGStitid,  . 

meansof  Text-  sions,  and  scriptural  quotations  found  in  the  works  of 
uai  Criticism,  ancient  writers.  Parallel  passages  and  critical  conjec- 
ture may  also  be  resorted  to  where  other  helps  are  doubtful.  The 
received  text  of  the  Old  Testament  is  commonly  called  the  Maso- 
retic,  from  the  sj^stem  of  vowel  points  and  the  critical  notes  ap- 
pended to  it  by  the  so-called  Masoretes,  or  Jewish  critics.  After 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Romans,  and  the  consequent 
dispersion  of  the  Jews,  many  learned  rabbins  continued  the  culti- 
vation of  their  national  literature.  A  celebrated  school  >vas  founded 
by  them  at  Tiberias,  on  the  coast  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  and  con- 
tinued until  tlie  sixth  centurv.  The  learned  critics  of  this  schooi. 
compiled  a  collection  of  the  critical  and  grammatical  observations 
of  the  great  teachei's,  and  called  it  the  Masorah.  A  most  important 
part  of  their  work  was  the  preparation  of  the  Keris  C""!;?,  to  he  read, 
as  distinguished  from  the  H'^n?,  that  xohv-h  is  vmtten;  i.  e.,  the  writ- 
ten text),  or  marginal  readings,  vrhich  these  critics  probably  gath- 
ered fi-om  manuscripts  or  tradition,  and  preferred  to  the  reading  of 
the  received  text  of  their  day.  So  scrupulously  careful  were  the 
Masoretes  of  every  word  and  letter  of  the  sacred  text,  that  they  at- 
tempted no  changes  in  it,  but  wrote  in  the  margin  that  which  in 
tlieir  judgment  should  be  read.    All  the  ancient  copies  used  by  these 

Greek  New  Testament  (Lond.,  1854).  See  also  the  introductions  to  the  critical  edi- 
tions of  the  Greelc  Testament  by  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Tregelles,  Alfoid,  and  West- 
cott  and  Hort. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  131 

critics  seem  to  have  perished,  and  the  later  manuscripts,  hundreds 
of  which  have  been  collated  by  Kennicott  and  De  Rossi,  have  little 
value  for  the  emendation  of  the  Old  Testament  text.  Hence  little 
has  been  attempted  in  this  line  within  the  last  hundred  years.  The 
ancient  versions  and  critical  conjecture  are  the  princijial  means  of 
revising  the  Hebrew  text,  and  such  means  are  always  to  be  used 
with  the  greatest  caution.' 

For  the  criticism  of  the  New  Testament  text  we  have  more  abun- 
dant materials.  There  are,  first,  the  uncial  manuscripts,  written 
in  Greek  capitals,  and  without  any  separation  of  words.  This  was 
the  most  ancient  form  of  writing,  and  prevailed  until  the  tenth 
century.  Next  we  have  the  cursive  manuscripts,  existing  in  the 
form  of  writing  which  came  into  use  in  the  latter  part  of  the  ninth 
century,  and  soon  afterward  became  the  common  style.  The  three 
most  ancient  and  valuable  uncials  are  the  so-called  Sinaitic,  the 
Alexandrian,  and  the  Vatican,  usually  designated,  respectively,  m, 
A,  and  B.  Several  of  the  cursive  manuscripts  are  of  great  value, 
having  evidently  been  copied  from  very  ancient  exemplars.  Next  to 
these  ancient  manuscripts  are  the  early  versions  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, especially  the  Latin  and  the  Syriac,  the  oldest  of  which  be- 
long, probably,  to  the  second  century.  The  quotations  from  the 
New  Testament,  found  in  the  Avritings  of  the  early  Church  Fathers, 
are  also  often  of  great  value  in  determining  the  original  text. 
These  different  sources  of  evidence  have  to  be  classified,  their  rela- 
tive value  critically  estimated,  and  reliable  rules  and  principles 
agreed  upon  for  their  use.  In  order  to  appreciate  properly  that 
vast  amount  of  labour  which  has  in  recent  years  restored  to  us  an 
approximately  pure  and  trustworthy  text  of  the  Greek  Testament, 
one  needs  to  make  himself  familiar  with  the  lives  and  works  of  the 
great  critics  Mill,  Bentley,  Bengel,  Wetstein,  Griesbach,  Lachmann, 
Tischendorf,  and  Tregelles. 

The  principal  Canons  of  Textual  Criticism  now  generally 
accepted  are  divisible  into  two  classes,  external  and  internal, 
and  may  be  stated  as  follows : 

External. 

The  canons  of  external  evidence  are  concerned  with  the  char- 
acter, age,  and  value  of  manuscripts,  and  the  principles  and  rules 
by  which  we  are  to  compare  and  estimate  the  relative  weight  of 
earlier  and  later  copies,  and  of  versions  and  quotations, 

^  A  critical  edition  of  the  Masoretic  text  of  the  several  books  of  the  Old  Testament  is 
now  in  course  of  publication  at  Leipsic,  under  the  editorial  care  of  S.  Baer  and  Fr.  De- 
litzsch.    It  furnishes  much  valuable  material  for  the  critical  study  of  the  Hebrew  text. 


132  INTRODUCTION   TO 

1.  A  reading  Avhich  is  supported  by  the  combined  testimony  of 
the  most  ancient  manuscripts,  the  earliest  versions,  and  patristic 
quotations,  is  generally,  without  doubt,  the  genuine  reading  of  the 
original  autograph. 

This  rule  is  so  self-evident  that  it  needs  no  comment ;  and  it  is 
an  interesting  and  important  fact  that  so  great  a  part  of  the  New 
Testament  rests  upon  evidence  so  decisive.  Though  the  whole 
number  of  various  readings  is  more  than  a  hundred  thousand,  by 
far  the  greater  part  of  them  consist  merely  of  differences  of  spelling, 
and  other  slight  variations  chiefly  due  to  the  peculiar  habits  of  the 
different  scribes.  The  doubtful  readings  which  essentially  affect 
the  sense  are  comparatively  few,  and  those  which  involve  questions 
of  important  doctrine  are  less  than  a  score.' 

2.  The  authority  and  value  of  manuscript  readings  consist  not  in 
the  number  of  manuscripts  in  which  a  given  reading  is  found,  but 
in  the  age,  character,  and  country  of  the  manuscripts. 

Though,  in  some  instances,  Ave  may  suppose  a  cursive  manuscript 
has  been  copied  directly  from  an  uncial  more  ancient  than  any  that 
now  exist,  yet,  as  a  rule,  the  uncials  are  older  and  more  authorita- 
tive than  the  cursives.  They  are,  therefore,  more  likely  to  repre- 
sent the  oldest  readings.  Respecting  the  age  and  value  of  ancient 
manuscripts,  we  owe  great  deference  to  the  judgment  of  experi- 
enced critics.  The  opinion  of  men  who,  like  Tischendorf  and 
Tregelles,  have  devoted  a  lifetime  to  conscientious  studv  and  col- 
lation of  manuscripts,  deservedly  carries  great  weight.  The  eye 
must  be  practiced  to  note  the  ancient  forms  of  letters,  and  the 
vai-ious  methods  of  writing,  abbreviation,  and  correction. 

3.  AVhcn  the  external  evidence  is  conflicting  and  of  nearly  equal 
weight,  special  importance  should  be  attached  to  the  corres])on- 
dency  between  widely  separated  witnesses. 

The  concurrence  of  two  ancient  maiuiscripts,  one  belonging  to 
the  East  and  the  other  to  the  West,  would  have  more  weight  than 
the  agreement  of   many    manuscripts   which   contain  evidence  of 

'  The  proportion  of  words  virtually  aocopted  on  all  hands  a?  raised  above  doiihf  is 
very  great — not  less,  on  a  rough  eomputation,  than  seven  eighths  of  the  whole.  The 
remaining  eighth,  therefore,  formed  in  great  part  by  changes  of  order  and  other  com- 
parative trivialities,  constitutes  the  whole  area  of  eritieism.  .  .  .  We  find  that,  set- 
ting aside  dilTiTcnoes  of  orthography,  the  words  in  our  opinion  still  subject  to  doubt 
only  make  up  aliout  one  sixtieth  of  the  whole  New  Testament.  In  this  second  esti- 
mate the  proportion  of  comparatively  trivial  variations  is  beyond  measure  larger  than 
the  former;  so  that  the  amount  of  what  can  in  any  sense  be  called  substantial  varia- 
tion is  but  a  small  fraction  of  the  whole  residuary  vai'iation,  and  can  hardly  form  more 
than  a  thousandth  part  of  the  entire  te.xt.  Westeott  and  Hort,  The  New  Testament 
in  the  original  Greek.     Introduction,  p.  2.     New  York,  1882. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  133 

having  been  copied  directly  from  one  another.  The  concm-rence 
of  tlie  Peshito,  the  Vulgate,  and  the  Ethiopia  versions  is  of  great 
weight  in  determining  a  doubtful  reading.  A  quotation  appear- 
ing in  the  same  form  in  the  writings  of  Origen,  Jerome,  and  Iren- 
aeus  w^ould.  thereby  acquire  an  authority  tantamount  to  that  of  so 
many  of  the  most  ancient  and  valuable  manuscripts. 

4,  Great  discrimination  is  necessary  in  the  use  of  the  different 
classes  of  external  evidence. 

The  reading  found  in  one  of  the  most  ancient  manuscripts  is 
usually  to  be  preferred  to  that  of  any  one  of  the  ancient  versions. 
But  there  may  be  considerations  of  time  or  place  which  would  ren- 
der the  reading  of  a  version  more  weighty  than  that  of  a  single 
manuscript.  The  authority  of  versions,  also,  would  be  greater  In 
the  case  of  omissions  or  additions  than  in  the  matter  of  verbal 
niceties.  Patristic  testimony,  as  observed  above,  depends  for  much 
of  its  value  on  the  place  and  circumstances  of  the  A\riter,  The 
manner  and  jnirpose  of  a  quotation  may  also  affect  its  worth  as  a 
witness  to  an  ancient  reading:. 

Internal. 

It  may  often  haj^pen  that  the  external  evidence  is  so  conflicting, 
and  yet  so  evenly  balanced,  that  it  is  impossible  from  that  source 
alone  to  form  any  judgment.  In  such  cases  we  resort  to  internal 
or  subjective  considerations,  which,  in  many  instances,  afford  the 
means  of  forming  a  reasonable  and  reliable  conclusion.  But  this 
kind  of  evidence  and  critical  conjecture  are  generally  to  be  used 
with  the  greatest  caution,  and  only  when  the  critic  is  obliged  to 
resort  to  such  means  from  want  of  better  evidence, 

1.  That  reading  which  accords  with  a  writer's  peculiar  style, 
with  the  context  and  the  nature  of  the  subject,  and  which  makes 
a  good  sense,  is  to  be  preferred  to  one  which  lacks  these  internal 
supports. 

This,  as  a  general  rule,  must  commend  itself  to  every  one's  judg- 
ment. But  particular  applications  of  it  may  vary.  There  can  be 
no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  true  reading  in  John  xiii,  24,  is  rig 
kariv,  who  is  it?  The  reading  riq  av  eit],  who  mhjht  it  bef  though 
sustained  by  several  ancient  authorities,  is  especially  to  be  rejected 
because  John  never  uses  the  optative  mood.  The  placing  of  k^eX- 
■BovTsg  after  avrov  in  the  textus  receptus  of  Matt,  xii,  1 4,  is  most 
probably  an  error  of  some  ancient  copyist,  and  the  reading  e^eX- 
■dovreg  de  ol  ^aptaaioi  QVfi(iovXiov  eXaftov  nar'  avrov  (supported  by 
N,  B,  C,  and  D,  and  adopted  by  Lachmann,  Tisehendorf,  Westcott 
and   Ilort),   is    to   be    preferred    because    in    similar    constructions 


134  INTRODUCTION   TO 

Matthew  uniformly  places  the  participle  before  its  noun.     Com- 
pare i,  24;  ii,  3;  iv,  12;  viii,  10,  14,  18;  ix,  4,  8,  9,  11,  19;  xii,  25. 

2.  The  shorter  reading  is  to  be  preferred  to  the  longei*. 
Transcribers  were  much  more  prone  to  add  than  to  omit,  and  in 

the  obscurer  passages  their  tendency  was  to  incorporate  marginal 
glosses  into  the  text,  or  even  to  venture  upon  an  explanation  of 
their  own.  The  words  jj^tj  Kara  odpKa  TrepiTTarovotv,  dXXd  Kara  rrvevna, 
who  icalk  not  according  to  flesh,  but  according  to  Spirit,  in  the  textiis 
receptus  of  Rom.  viii,  1,  are  wanting  in  most  of  the  ancient  authori- 
ties, and  are  doubtless  an  ancient  gloss  introduced  from  verse  4  of 
the  same  chapter,  where  they  appear  in  their  true  connection.  So, 
too,  the  words,  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  it  shall  be  more  tolerable 
for  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  in  the  day  of  judgment  than  for  that  city," 
found  in  the  Alexandrian  Codex  at  Mark  vi,  11,  was  probably 
added  by  some  ancient  scribe  from  memory  of  Matt,  x,  15,  where 
the  reading  is  "  land  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah."  According  to  this 
rule,  when  the  evidences  in  favour  of  the  insertion  or  omission  of  a 
word,  clause,  or  sentence  are  about  equally  divided,  it  is  safer  to 
omit  than  to  insert. 

3.  The  more  difficult  and  obscure  reading  is  to  be  preferred  to 
the  plainer  and  easier  one. 

This  rule  of  course  applies  especially  to  those  passages  where 
there  is  reason  to  believe  the  transcriber  was  tempted  to  soften  or 
simplify  the  language,  or  explain  an  apparent  difficulty.  The  word 
sXeTjfioavvi],  alms,  was  anciently  substituted  for  the  harsher  Hebra- 
istic word  6iKaioavvi],  righteousness,  in  Matt.  \\,  1.  The  insertion 
of  the  word  eIkt],  irif/iout  cause,  in  Matt,  v,  22,  seems,  in  view  of 
the  strong  external  evidence  against  it,  to  have  been  introduced  to 
soften  the  sentiment.  Alford  puts  it  in  brackets,  and  says:  "I 
have  not  ventured  Avholly  to  exclude  it,  the  authorities  being  so 
divided,  and  internal  evidence  being  equally  indecisive.  Griesbach 
and  Meyer  hold  it  to  liave  been  expunged  from  motives  of  moral 
rigourism;  De  Wetto,  to  have  been  inserted  to  soften  the  apparent 
rigour  of  the  precept.  The  latter  seems  to  me  the  more  probable." 
Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Westcott  and  ITort  omit  the  word,  and 
Tregelles  marks  it  as  extremely  doubtful. 

Under  this  head  we  would  also  place  the  well-known  rule  of 
Griesbach:  "That  reading  is  to  be  preferred  which  presents  a  sen- 
timent apparently  false,  but  which  upon  more  careful  examination 
is  found  to  be  true." '     A  notable  example  is  seen  in  1  Cor.  xi,  29, 

'Prreferatur  aliis  lectis,  cui  sensus  subest  apparentor  quidem  falsus,  qui  vero  re 
penitius  exaiiiiiiata  vcrus  esse  dcprchcnditur.  Griesbach,  Novum  Tostairieiitum(Jraece 
(2  vols.,  London,  1809),  vol.  i,  Prolegonieua,  p.  Ixvi. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  135 

where  the  majority  of  ancient  authorities  have  inserted  the  word 
dva^iwg,  unworthily,  which  appears  in  verse  27  in  all  copies.  Fonr 
of  the  most  important  uncial  manuscripts,  however  (A,  B,  CJ  N^),  and 
several  cursives  and  versions  omit  the  word.  Its  insertion  from 
verse  27  appears  to  have  arisen  from  misapprehending  the  exact 
force  of  Hi]  in  the  clause  ju^  6iaKpiv(ov  to  acbjia,  which  is  here  equiva- 
lent to  lohen  not,  or  if  not,  and  therefore  different  from  the  strong- 
er and  more  simple  negative  ov.  The  apparently  unqualified  state- 
ment: "lie  that  eats  and  drinks,  eats  and  drinks  judgment  unto 
himself,"  seemed  to  convey  a  false  statement,  and  to  remove  the 
difficulty  dva^LO)g  was  inserted.  The  whole  passage  becomes  clear 
by  a  correct  rendering  of  the  qualifying  clause,  if  7iot  discerning 
the  hodi/.  More  difficult  is  it  to  decide  between  the  two  readings 
Trpwrof  and  voregog,  in  Matt,  xxi,  31  ;  Ttpwrof  is  sustained  by  the 
greatest  number  of  ancient  authorities,  and  is  suited  to  the  context. 
But  voregog  is  found  in  two  of  the  most  important  manuscripts 
(B  and  D),  and  is  the  more  difficult  reading.  It  is  easier  to  see 
how  TrpwTOf  may  have  become  substituted  for  varegog  than  the  re- 
verse. Hence  Lachmann,  Tregelles,  Westcott  and  Hort  adopt  the 
reading  voregog;  but  Tischendorf  and  Alford  read  vrpwrof.  From 
this  last  example  it  will  be  seen  what  great  caution  is  necessary  in 
the  application  of  this  rule,  and  also  how  a  final  decision  may  not 
be  possible  in  the  case.' 

Under  this  canon  it  may  also  be  added  that,  in  parallel  passages, 
verbal  differences  are  generally  considered  preferable  to  exact  ver- 
bal conformity,  inasmuch  as  transcribers  are  apt  to  harmonize  such 
difTerences  where  they  attract  attention. 

4.  That  reading  is  to  be  preferred  from  which  all  the  others 
may  be  seen  to  have  been  naturally  or  readily  derived. 

"  That  is  to  say,"  says  Gardiner,  "  when  there  are  different  read- 
ings which  have  each  of  them  important  evidence  in  its  favour,  the 
one  from  which  the  others  could  have  been  easily  derived  is  more 
likely  to  be  true  than  one  from  which  they  could  not  have  been."  '^ 
Under  this  rule  it  is  claimed  that  og  is  the  genuine  reading  in  the 

'  "When  no  certainty  is  attainable,"  says  Tregelles,  "it  will  be  well  for  the  case  to 
be  left  as  doubtful.  ...  A  critical  text  of  the  Greek  New  Testament,  with  no  indica- 
tions of  doubt,  or  of  the  inequality  of  the  evidence,  is  never  satisfactory  to  a  scholar. 
It  gives  no  impression  of  the  ability  of  the  editor  to  discriminate  accurately  as  to  the 
value  of  evidence ;  and  it  seems  to  place  on  a  level,  as  to  authority,  readings  which 
are  unquestionably  certain,  and  those  which  have  been  accepted  as  perhaps  the  beat 
attested." — Home,  Introduction  (Ed.  Ayre  and  Tregelles),  vol.  iv,  p.  344. 

"  The  Principles  of  Textual  Criticism,  with  a  List  of  all  the  Known  Greek  Uncials, 
in  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  April,  1875.  Also  published  as  an  Appendix  to  the  Greek 
Hanpony  of  the  Four  Gospels  by  the  same  author. 


136  miRODUCTION   TO 

much-disputed  text  of  1  Tim.  iii,  16.  For  a  long  time  the  Alexan- 
drian and  Epliraem  Syrus  manuscripts  (A  and  C)  were  said  to  giA'e 
the  reading  deog  (written  in  uncials  90),  but  recent  and  thor- 
ough examination  by  the  most  competent  ci'itics  has  discovered  that 
the  transverse  line  in  the  9,  and  the  sign  of  contraction,  are  the 
work  of  a  later  hand.  The  Codex  Sinaiticus  has  been  tampered 
with  in  this  place  by  several  later  hands;  the  latest  of  all,  accord- 
ing to  Tischendorf,  altei'ed  the  manuscript  about  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury, but  so  carefully  as  not  to  deface  the  more  ancient  reading. 
The  Clermont  manuscript  (D),  as  is  now  conceded,  originally  read 
S,  but  a  later  hand  changed  the  readmg  to  90.  This  change  was 
done  by  erasing  enough  of  the  O  to  leave  O,  and  then,  as  this  letter 
stood  at  the  beginning  of  the  line,  O  was  easily  placed  before  it. 
The  reading  o  may  have  arisen  in  the  attempt  of  an  ancient  scribe 
to  correct  what  seemed  to  be  a  grammatical  inaccuracy,  and  write 
the  relative  o  to  conform  with  the  gender  of  \ivgt7)()lov.  Or,  a  Lat- 
in scribe  may  have  so  corrected  the  reading  as  to  make  it  conform 
to  quod^  which  appears  as  the  reading  of  the  old  Latin  version.  If 
we  suppose  the  original  reading  to  have  been  00,  it  is  difHcult  to 
explain  how  the  readings  00  and  O  should  appear  in  the  most  an- 
cient manuscripts;  but,  as  shown  above,  it  is  not  difficult  to  show 
how  the  word  00  may  have  been  changed  into  00  or  O.^ 

lie  Avho  carefully  studies  and  applies  the  above  rules  of  textual 
These  canons  Criticism  will  observe  that  they  are  principles  rather 
rrtiieTThan  *^^^'^  rules.  They  must  not  be  applied  mechanically,  as 
rules.  if  mere  majorities  of  witnesses  decided  any  thing.     A 

great  number  and  variety  of  considerations  must  enter  into  the 
formation  of  a  sound  critical  judgment,  and  every  element  of  evi- 
dence must  be  carefully  weighed.  "The  point  aimed  at,"  says 
Tregelles,  "  is  a  moral  certainty,  or  a  moral  ])robability.  To  arrive 
at  this  we  must  use  the  evidence  that  is  attainable;  the  truest  prin- 
ciples must  be  borne  in  mind  which  teach  the  proper  estimation  of 
such  evidence;  and  also  the  judgment  must  be  exercised,  so  as  to 
be  accustomed  to  draw  the  moral  conclusions  applicable  to  the  sub- 
ject. It  is  thus  that  some  critics  possess  that  critical  tact  by 
whicli  they  have  been  distinguished;  they  form  a  sound  conclusion 
without  apparently  going  through  any  elaborate  process  of  reason- 
ing. And  this  leads  others  to  imagine  that  criticism  is  a  kind  of 
intuitive  faculty,  although  the  conclusions  have  really  resulted 
from  quickness  in  perceiving  what  the  evidence  is,  and  a  well-exer- 
cised judgment  in   applying  known  principles  to  the  evidence  so 

'  See  an  extensive  and  careful  examination  of  the  various  readings  of  1  Tim.  iii,  10, 
in  the  Bil)liothcca  Sacra  for  January,  1865,  pp.  1-50. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  137 

apprehended."  And  the  same  consummate  critic  adds,  in  another 
place:  "He  who  rightly  studies  the  principles  and  facts  of  the 
textual  criticism  of  the  New  Testament,  will  find  that  he  has  ac- 
quired information  not  on  one  subject  merely,  hut  also  on  almost 
all  of  those  that  relate  to  the  transmission  of  Scripture  from  the 
days  of  the  apostles;  he  will  have  obtained  that  kind  of  instructum 
which  will  impart  both  a  breadth  and  a  definiteness  to  all  his  bibli- 
cal studies;  he  will  be  led  into  a  kind  of  unconscious  connection 
with  the  writers  of  Scripture  and  their  works." ' 


CHAPTER   YIII. 

THE   DIVINE    INSPIRATION   OF   THE   SCRIPTURES. 

Our  appreciation  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  will  necessarily  be  influ- 
enced by  our  views  of  their  claims  as  divinely  inspired.  Critical 
and  ex^getical  study  will  be  more  or  less  serious  and  painstaking 
as  the  student  feels  a  deep  conviction  that  he  is  handling  the  very 
word  of  God. 

There  is  an  inspiration  in  all  great  works  of  genius.  Those  mas- 
terpie(!es  of  oratory,  which,  burning  from  the  impas-  inspiration  ot 
sioned  souls  of  Demosthenes  and  Cicero,  aroused  Atlie-  g*'""''^- 
nian  and  Roman  audiences,  are  to  this  day  full  of  moving  power. 
The  poems  of  Homer  and  the  oracles  of  Socrates  reveal  the  inspi- 
ration of  genius.  Passages  in  Shakspeare,  Milton,  and  Byron  ex- 
hibit a  power  of  expression  and  a  perfection  of  form  Avhich  m  ill 
ever  charm  the  minds  of  men.  AVho  will  deny  Toplady's  "  Rock 
of  Ages  "  and  Charles  Wesley's  "  Wrestling  Jacob  "  a  notable  de- 
gree of  divine  inspiration  ?  But  the  great  body  of  believers  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures  have  ever  felt  that  the  inspiration  of  the  Bible  is 
something  far  higher  and  more  divine  than  the  rapture  of  human 
genius. 

The  inspiration  of  genius  is  from  within,  that  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
from  without.     The  one  is  becrotten  of  the  human  soul,  „     . 

®  Scripture  m- 

the  other  is  by  revelation  from  the   supernatural   and  spiration  high- 
divine.     The  biblical  writers  themselves  assume  to  write  ^^' 
by  a  supernatural  authority;  they  speak  as  men  who  have  seen  the 
visions  of  the  Almighty,  have  heard  the  voice  of  the  rcA^ealer  of 
secrets,  and  are  moved  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit.     It  may 

'  S.  P.  Tregelles,  Introduction  to  the  Textual  Criticism  and  Study  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, in  Home's  Introduction  (ed.  Ayre  and  Tregelles),  vol.  iv,  pp.  343,  401. 


Xi8  INTRODUCTION    TO 

be  safely  asserted  that,  in  some  sense,  the  sacred  writers  were  used 
mechanically;  they  were  often  employed  as  the  media  of  words 
and  symbols  which  they  could  not  comprehend.  They  were  in- 
spired dynamically,  for  they  were  actuated  by  a  supernatural  force 
and  wisdom  which  supervised  their  work,  and  directed  them  so  as 
to  secure  the  very  purpose  of  the  Almighty.  In  their  inspiration 
there  was  a  verbal  element,  for  God  is  represented  as  speaking  by 
*•'  the  mouth  of  all  his  prophets."  "  Behold,"  he  says  to  .Jeremiah 
(i,  9),  "  I  have  put  my  words  in  thy  mouth,"  Paul  clahiis  to  set 
forth  the  saving  truth  of  God  "  not  in  words  taught  by  human  wis- 
dom, but  in  those  taught  by  the  Spirit  "  (1  Cor.  ii,  13).  Every  d*- 
vout  Christian  will  acknowledge  that  this  inspiration  was  plenary, 
inasmuch  as  it  has  furnished  in  all-sufficient  fulness  a  revelation  of 
the  mind  and  will  of  God.  But  when  we  attempt  to  say  where  the 
divine  element  in  Scripture  ends,  or  where  the  human  begins,  we 
involve  ourselves  in  mysteries  which  no  man  is  able  to  solve. 

According  tq  the  evangelical  faith,  maintained  by  the  Christian 

^.  .  ,.  Church  in  all  ages,  there  exist  in  the  sacred  records 
Divme  and  nu-  .    . 

man  in  the  two  elements,  a  divine  and  a  human.  In  this  respect 
cnp  ures.  there  is  a  noteworthy  analogy,  between  the  personal,  in- 
carnate word,  and  the  written  Avord.  As,  in  studying  tlie  person  and 
character  of  Christ,  we  most  naturally  begin  with  the  human  side, 
observing  that  which  is  tangible  to  sense,  so  it  will  be  well  for  us 
to  examine,  first,  the  human  lineaments  of  the  written  word  of  God. 
It  is  evident  that  a  considerable  portion  of  the  Bible  is  a  narra- 
Human  eie-  tive  of  facts  which  any  ordinary  mind  might  have  gath- 
ment  seen  m   gj.g^|  ^^^^  p^^^  jj^  Written  form.     Such,  for  example,  is 

the  narration  of  ,  ^  ,  '      _  ^      ' 

facts.  the  history  of  the  rise,  power,  glory,  decline,  and  fall  of 

the  kingdom  of  Israel,  as  contained  in  the  Books  of  Samuel,  Kings, 
and  Chronicles.  Many  parts  of  these  books  appear  to  have  been 
compiled  directly  from  pre-existing  documents.'  The  Book  of  Ne- 
hemiah  is  an  autobiography,  and  "that  of  Esther  a  lively  sketch  of 
court-life  in  the  Persian  Empire.  In  the  preface  to  his  gospel, 
Luke  professes  to  set  forth  an  orderly  arrangement  of  facts  fully 
believed  among  the  earliest  Christians,  reported  by  eye-witnesses, 
and  accurately  traced  by  himself  from  the  very  first.  The  Acts  of 
the  Apostles,  by  the  same  author,  is  a  simple  narrative  of  the  be- 
ginnings of  the  Christian  Church.  In  these  books  especially,  but 
in  others  also,  there  appears  no  necessity  or  occasion  for  claiming 
an  extraordinary  assistance  for  the  writers.  INIany  a  writer,  for 
whom  no  such  claim  was  ever  made,  has  traced  and  recorded  facts 

'  Compare  1  Kings  xi,  41;  xiv,  29;  xv,  31;  1  Chron.  xxix,  29;  2  Cbron.  xxxii, 
82,  etc. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  1G9 

in  human  history  with  a  painstaking  care  and  accuracy  as  great  as 
the  biblical  narratives  evince. 

The  human  element  is  also  noticeable  in  the  style  and  diction  of 
the  sacred  writers.     No  one  can  fail  to  observe  how   „ 

•  If  T  •1-nri  Seen    also    in 

Widely  Isaiah  diiiers  m  style  from  Jeremiah,  Matthew  style  and  dic- 
from  John,  and  Paul  from  James.  The  distinct  indi-  ^'"°" 
viduality  of  each  author  is  conspicuous,  and  there  is  no  reason  to 
suppose  that  any  of  these  writers  were  hindered  in  the  freest  exer- 
cise of  their  natural  faculties,  or  in  the  normal  use  of  their  peculiar 
modes  of  thought  and  expression.  We  should  explain  the  marked 
difference  of  style  in  the  prayers  of  Daniel  (chap,  ix,  4-19)  and 
Habakkuk  (chap,  iii),  the  song  of  Moses  (Exod.  xv,  1-19),  and  the 
3IagniJicat  of  Mary  (Luke  i,  46-55),  as  we  explain  the  differencas 
between  Milton's  "  Hymn  of  the  Nativity  "  and  Pope's  "  Messiah," 
or  between  an  exquisite  passage  of  Addison  and  an  oration  of 
Daniel  Webster. 

Other  human  lineaments  are  observable  in  the  subject-matter, 
where  expression  is  given  to  the  writer's  personal  affec-  seeninsubject- 
tion  for  individuals,  or  to  his  sense  of  want  and  weak-  matter, 
ness.  The  whole  catalogue  of  personal  greetings  in  the  sixteenth 
chapiter  of  Romans  is  an  illustration  of  this;  also  the  tender  famil- 
iarity of  Panl  with  his  Thessalonian  converts,  and  the  personal 
reminiscences  of  his  first  acquaintance  (ii,  1),  his  departure  (ii,  17, 
18),  and  his  being  ''left  in  Athens  alone"  (iii,  1).  The  human  ele- 
ment is  conspicuous  in  his  defence  of  his  apostleship  in  the  first  two 
chapters  of  Galatians,  in  his  remembrance  of  the  Philippians'  kind- 
ness (Phil,  iv,  15-18),  in  his  messages  to  the  Ephesians  by  Tychi- 
eus  (Eph.  vi,  21),  and  his  desire  for  the  books,  parchments,  and 
cloak  left  at  Troas  (2  Tim.  iv,  13).  He  exhibits,  also,  some  doubt 
and  hesitation  as  to  whether,  at  Corinth,  he  baptized  any  others 
besides  Crispus,  Gaius,  and  the  household  of  Stephanas  (1  Cor.  i, 
14,  16),  and  in  his  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  he  writes:  "In 
lack  of  wisdom  I  speak"  (2  Cor.  xi,  21);  "as  one  beside  himself  I 
say  it "  (ver.  23) ;  "  I  am  become  a  fool;  ye  compelled  me  "  (xii,  ]  1). 

To  the  above  instances  we  may  also  add  the  varying  forms  of 
statement  under  which  the  same  things  is  reported  to  us  _ 
by  different  writers.  Observe  the  numerous  verbal  forms  of  siate- 
differences  in  the  parable  of  the  soAver  as  reported  by  "^^"  ' 
Matthew  (xiii,  4-9),  Mark  (iv,  3-9),  and  Luke  (viii,  5-8);  or  in  the 
parable  of  the  mustard  seed  (Matt,  xiii,  31,  32;  Mark  iv,  30-32  ;  Luke 
xiii,  IS,  19),  and  in  numerous  other  sayings  of  our  Lord.  Coni2)are, 
especially,  the  diff'erent  forms  of  the  Lord's  Prayer  (Matt,  vi,  9-13; 
Luke  xi,  2-4),  and  of  the  language  used  in  instituting  the  Lord's  Sup- 


140  INTRODUCTION   TO 

per  (Matt,  xxvi,  26-29;  Mark  xiv,  22-24;  Luke  xxii,  19,  20;  1  Cor.  xi, 
23-25).  The  only  rational  and  truly  satisfactory  way  of  explaining:; 
such  verl)al  discrepancies  is  to  hold  (what  seems  so  apparent  and 
natural)  that  the  writers  freely  reported,  each  in  his  own  indepen- 
dent way,  the  substance  of  what  the  Lord  had  said.  The  Lord  had 
probably  spoken  in  Aramaic,  but  his  words  are  reported  in  Greek. 
So,  perhaps,  no  one  of  the  evangelists  has  given  us  the  exact  form 
of  the  title  on  the  cross;  but  each  one  records  its  substance  and 
purport  in  a  different  form  of  words  (Matt,  xxvii,  37;  Mark  xv,  26; 
Luke  xxiii,  38;  John  xix,  19).  In  all  these  varying  reports  tliere 
is  no  error,  no  real  discrepancy;  but  simply  that  variety  of  human 
expression  which  is  common  to  all  the  languages  of  men. 

But,  along  with  the  human  element  in  the  Scriptures,  there  are 
Evidences  of  ^^^'^  ^^6  claim  and  the  evidence  of  a  divine  inspiration, 
divine  element.  Paul  says:  "All  Scripture  is  God-breathed"  {-^eo-- 
vevorog,  2  Tim.  iii,  16),  and  Peter  writes:  "For  not  by  the  will  of 
man  was  prophecy  ever  brought,  but,  borne  along  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  men  spoke  from  God"  (2  Peter  i,  21).  Here  is  a  most  im- 
portant assertion.  He  declares  in  the  verse  preceding  that  "no 
prophecy  of  Scripture  comes  of  its  own  interpretation,"  or  springs 
out  of  the  human  understanding.'  The  Scripture  jirophocies  are 
no  products  of  human  invention  or  ingenuity,  for  the  men  who 
Peter's  deciar-  wrote  them  "  spoke  from  God,"  as  they  were  impelled 
^'■^"'^*  or  carried  along  {(pegofxevoi)  by  the  divine  power.     In 

his  "first  epistle  the  same  apostle  tells  how  the  prophets  diligently 
sought  and  searched  (e^ei^^Trjaav  teal  e^7]Qavvrj<7av)  concerning  salva- 
tion, "searching  into  what  time  or  what  manner  of  time  the  Spirit 
of  Christ  in  them  was  signifying  Avhen  he  testified  beforehand  the 
sufferings  pertaining  to  Christ  and  the  glories  after  them;  to  whom 
it  was  revealed  that  not  to  themselves,  but  to  you  they  were  minis- 
tering that  whicii  is  now  announced  to  you  through  those  who 
preached  you  the  gospel  by  tlie  Holy  Spirit  sent  from  heaven" 
(1  Peter  i,  11,  12).  We  should  observe  the  following  four  things 
here  atHrmed:  (1)  the  prophets  were  actuated  by  the  Spirit  of 
Christ;  (2)  they  did  not  fully  comprehend  the  time-limits  of  their 
own  oracles;  (3)  they  were  given  to  understand  that  their  words 
would  minister  help  to  after  times;  (4)  the  first  preachers  of  the 

'The  reference  is,  as  Lumby  observes,  "to  prophecy  as  it  was  uttered  by  those 
who  first  gave  it  forth.  It  did  not  arise  from  the  private  interpretation  of  the  proph- 
ets. The  words  of  the  prophets  of  old  were  no  mere  human  exposition,  no  endeav- 
our on  man's  part  to  point  to  a  solution  of  the  difficulties  which  beset  men's  minds 
in  (Ids  life.  The  prophets  were  moved  by  a  Spirit  beyond  themselves,  and  spake 
things  deeper  than  they  themselves  understood." — tJpeaker's  Commentary  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  141 

gospel  were  also  actuated  by  the  same  Holy  Spirit,  and  their  mes- 
sages had  heavenly  origin  and  authority. 

The  Old  Testament  abounds  in  assertions  of  the  divine  origin  of 
its  lessons  and  revelations.  A  large  proportion  of  the  o](j  Testament 
Pentateuch  is  professedly  Jehovah's  revelation  of  him-  claims, 
self  to  the  patriarchs,  or  his  express  word  of  commandment  to 
Moses  and  to  Israel.  The  Decalogue  is  said  to  have  been  uttered 
by  God's  own  voice  out  of  the  midst  of  his  theophany  of  fire  and 
cloud  on  Horeb  (Exod.  xix,  9;  xx,  I,  19;  Deut.  v,  4,  22),  and  after- 
ward written  by  "  the  finger  of  God,"  and  delivered  to  Moses  on 
tablets  of  stone  (Exod.  xxxi,  18).  The  prophets  continually  an- 
nounce their  messages  as  the  word  of  Jehovah,  and  make  frequent 
use  of  the  formulas,  "  Hear  the  word  of  Jehovah,"  and  "  Thus  saith 
Jehovah."  Jesus  recognized  this  same  divine  inspiration  and  au- 
thority in  the  Psalms;  it  was  David  speaking  "in  the 
Spirit"  (Matt,  xxii,  43).  And  when  he  sent  forth  his 
disciples,  and  foretold  their  persecutions,  he  comforted  them  with 
these  words:  "When  they  deliver  you  up,  take  no  thought  how  or 
what  ye  shall  speak;  for  it  shall  be  given  you  in  that  hour  what  ye 
shall  speak.  For  it  is  not  ye  that  speak,  but  the  spirit  of  your  Fa- 
ther that  speaks  in  you"  (Matt,  x,  19,  20).  If  such  divine  power 
directed  these  founders  of  Christianity  when  they  spoke  before 
their  enemies,  much  more  may  we  believe  that  the  Scriptures  writ- 
ten by  them  were  inspired  by  God.  For  they  had  also  the  prom- 
ise: "The  Comforter,  the  Holy  Spirit,  whom  the  Father  will  send 
in  my  name,  he  will  teach  you  all  things,  and  bring  to  your  remem- 
brance all  things  which  I  said  to  you."  "  He  will  guide  you  into 
all  the  truth;  for  he  will  not  speak  from  himself,  but  whatever  he 
hears  he  will  speak,  and  he  will  tell  yon  the  things  to  come.  He 
will  glorify  me;  because  he  will  receive  of  mine,  and  will  tell  you. 
All  things  whatever  the  Father  has  are  mine;  therefore  I  said  that 
of  mine  he  receives,  and  will  tell  you"  (John  xiv,  26;  xvi,  13-15). 
How  they  subsequently  rememhered  the  Lord's  words  is  told  in 
Luke  xxiv,  8;  John  ii,  22;  xii,  16;  and  Acts  xi,  16;  and  the  author- 
ity with  which  they  spoke  may  be  seen  in  Paul's  words  to  the 
Thessalonians:  "  When  ye  received  the  word  of  God  heard  from 
us,  ye  received  not  the  word  of  men,  but,  as  it  is  in  truth,  the  word 
of  God"  (1  Thess.  ii,  13). 

In  citing  these   declarations   of  the   Scriptures,   we   assume,   of 
course,  the  divine  origin  of  Christianity,  and  the  au- 

1  ••  1  ipT  ,.1^  Credibility     of 

thenticity  and  truthfulness  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa-   the  scriptu.ns 
ments.     Our  argument  is  not  with  the  unbeliever  and   J^^re  assuuied. 
the  sceptic,  but  with  those  who  accept  both  Testaments  as  in  some 


143  ESTTRODUCTION    TO 

sense  the  word  of  God;  and  our  inquiry  is  concerned  merely  with 
the  nature  and  extent  of  their  inspiration.  This  question  must  not 
be  judged  and  decided  a  priori.  We  need  to  look  at  facts  of  the 
history,  contents,  and  scope  of  the  several  parts,  as  well  as  ex- 
plicit declarations,  of  the  Bible.  "SViili  these  constantly  in  mind, 
and  disregarding  all  special  theories,  we  may  be  helped  by  the  fol- 
lowing considerations : 

I.  God,  from  the  beginning,  planned  to  furnish  for  mankind  such 
a  written  testimony  of  his  works,  judgments,  and  will,  as  Avould 
always  be  "  profitable  for  teaching,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for 
instruction  in  righteousness."  The  grand  purpose  of  all  is,  "  that 
the  man   of   God  may  be  perfect,  thorouglily  furnished  unto   all 

^  ,   ^.     srood  works"  (2  Tim.  iii,   10,   17).     To  fill  out   such  a 
The  whole  Bi-    »  ^  .  .  m 

bio  God's  book   plan  and  purpose  required  thousands  of   years.      The 

for  man.  record  was  to  embody  a  revelation  of  the  creation  of 

man,  and  of  God's  gracious  dealings  and  righteous  judgments 
through  the  lapse  of  ages.  It  was  to  be  a  record  of  prophecy  and 
its  fulfihnent,  of  miracle,  and  promise,  and  comfort.  Truth  and 
righteousness  were  to  be  exhibited  in  the  concrete  by  an  ample 
record  of  the  experiences  of  holy  men.  Accordingly  God  spoke  in 
many  parts  and  in  many  ways  to  the  fathers  by  the  prophets  (lleb. 
i,  1),  and,  at  last,  by  the  incarnation  and  ministry  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  by  the  apostles,  completed  the  providential  record  of  religious 
truth  and  enlightenment.  Thus  the  Bible  is  pre-eminently  God's 
book,  a  body  of  writings  providentially  prepared  by  divine  wisdom 
for  the  relio^ious  instruction  of  mankind. 

IL  As  regards  the  varied  contents  of  this  God-given  book,  it  is 
Subject-matter  ^^®^^'  '^^^^'^  many  recent  writers/  to  distinguish  between 
revealed  or  In-  revelation  and  inspiration.  The  subject-matter  of  many 
^^^^'^  ■  parts  of  the  Scriptures  is  of  such  a  character  as  to  lie 

beyond  the  unaided  powers  of  the  human  mind  to  discover.  Such 
portions  must  have  been  communicated  in  some  supernatural  way, 
and  were,  therefore,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  a  divine  revela- 
tion. Inspiration,  on  the  other  hand,  was  the  divine  influence  and 
supervision  under  which  the  sacred  writers  made  a  record  of  Avhat 
came  to  their  knowledge  either  by  revelation  or  otherwise.  "  Rev- 
elation and  inspiration,"  says  Lee,  "  are  to  be  distinguished  by  the 
sources  from  which  they  proceed,  revelation  being  the  peculiar 
function  of  the  eternal  Word;  inspiration  the  result  of  the  agency 

'  See,  especially,  Lee,  on  the  Inspiration  of  Holy  Scripture,  Lectures  i,  iv,  ami  v, 
and  E.  P.  Barrow's  articles  on  Revelation  and  Inspiration,  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra 
for  Oct.,  1867,  April,  1808,  Jan.  and  July,  1869,  Jan.,  July,  and  Oct.,  1870,  Oct.,  1871, 
Jan.,  July,  and  Oct.,  1872,  and  April,  1873. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  143 

of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Tlieir  difference  is  specific,  and  not  merely  one 
of  degree,  a  point  which  is  amply  confirmed  by  the  consideration 
that  either  of  these  divine  influences  may  be  exerted  without  call- 
ing the  other  into  action.  The  patriarchs  received  revelations, 
but  they  were  not  inspired  to  record  them;  the  writer  of  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles  Avas  inspired  for  his  task,  but  we  are  not  told  that 
he  ever  enjoyed  a  revelation." ' 

It  is  easy  to  see  that  the  narrative  of  creation  could  have  been 
furnished  only  in  some  supernatural  way,  for  no  human  eye  ob- 
served it.  The  visions  and  dreams  of  patriarchs  and  prophets  were 
modes  of  receiving  divine  communications  (Num.  xii,  6).  Balaam 
was  so  controlled  by  a  supernatural  force  that  he  could  ntter  no 
word  or  vt^ill  of  his  own  (Num.  xxii,  38;  xxiii,  26;  xxiv,  13).  The 
ten  commandments  were  uttered  by  the  voice  (Exod.  xx,  1,  19)  and 
written  by  the  finger  of  God  (Exod.  xxxi,  ]  8).  Large  portions  of 
the  prophecies  are  expressly  declared  to  be  Jehovah's  oracles,  and 
foretell  the  things  to  come.  The  words  of  the  Lord  Jesus  must  be 
accepted  by  every  devout  Christian  as  of  absolute  authority.  But, 
on  the  other  hand,  as  we  have  shown  above,  large  portions  of  the 
Scripture  are  records  of  matters  which  the  writers  could  have  ascer- 
tained withoiit  supernatural  aid.  Yet  we  are  told  that  all  scrip- 
ture is  inspired  by  God.  The  final  question,  then,  is  reduced  to 
the  nature  and  degree  of  the  inspiration. 

.  HI.  On  this  point  we  affirm  the  proposition,  that  a  particular 
divine  providence  secured  the  composition  of  the  Scrip-   inspiration    a 

tures  in  the  language  and  form  in  which  we  possess  p^''''^''^"''^''  <^i- 
'^      ^  ,       ,  ^  vine        provi- 

them.  Moses  at  the  beginning  of  the  sacred  volume,  dence. 
and  John  at  its  close,  were  commanded  to  avrite.  The  divine 
revelations  of  which  we  have  spoken  would  have  been  compara- 
tively useless  unless  divine  Providence  had  secured  an  accurate 
and  faithful  record  of  them  to  be  transmitted  through  the  ages. 
For  the  preparation  of  such  a  record  holy  men  were  inspired  of 
God.  Many  revelations  may  have  been  given  which  are  not  re- 
corded, as  well  as  many  facts  and  experiences  which  would  have 
been  profitable  for  religious  instruction.  But  the  Divine  Wisdom 
guided  the  human  agents  in  selecting  such  facts  and  reporting  such 
truths  as  would  best  accomplish  the  purpose  of  God  in  providing  a 
written  revelation  for  the  world.  We  see  no  good  reason  for  deny- 
ing that  the  divine  guidance  extended  to  all  parts  and  forms  of  the 
record.  God  secured  the  composition  of  the  Pentateuch  in  just  the 
form  and  style  in  which  we  have  it.  He  secured  the  writing  of  the 
Book  of  Job  for  the  great  religious  lessons  it  embodies.     Half  of  it 

'  luspiration  of  Holy  Scripture,  Lecture  i,  p.  42. 


144  INTRODUCTION  TO 

may  be  composed  of  tlie  erroneous  notions  of  self-conceited  and 
mistaken  men;  but  it  must  be  studied  as  a  wbole,  and  its  several 
parts,  as  bearing  on  the  one  great  problem  of  human  suifering, 
will  then  appear  as  a  most  beautiful  and  impressive  form  of  setting 
forth  certain  lessons  of  divine  providence  and  judgment.  Tlie 
genealogies  of  Chronicles,  Ezra,  and  other  books,  are  similarly, 
parts  of  a  whole,  and  links  in  the  history  of  Israel.  So  the  histor- 
ical books,  the  Prophets,  the  Psalms,  the  Gospels,  and  the  Epistles 
subserve  a  manifold  divine  purpose.  God  has  provided  that  these 
books,  and  no  others,  should  be  written  and  preserved  through  the 
ages  as  divinely  authoritative  for  instruction  in  righteousness,  and 
to  this  end  he  called,  actuated,  energized,  and  supervised  the  holy 
men  Avho  wrote  them. 

The  notion  that  the  Almighty  Spirit  absolutely  controlled  the 
Divine    inspi-  sacred  writers,  so  as  to  select  for  them  the  very  words 

ration    affects   ^^        employed,   is  repugnant  to  the  thoughtful  mind. 

language    and  j  i      J       y  i    »  ^ 

style.  There  is  no  evidence,  withm  or  without  the  record,  of 

any  such  mechanical  operation.  But  Ave  conceive  that  the  language 
and  style  of  a  writer  may  be  mightily  aifected  by  divine  influences 
brought  to  bear  upon  his  soul.  Such  influences  would  produce  im- 
portant effects  in  his  thoughts  and  his  words.  To  aflirm,  Avith 
some,  that  God  supplied  the  thoughts  or  ideas  of  Scripture,  but  left 
the  writers  perfectly  free  in  their  choice  of  Avords,  jtends  to  con- 
fuse the  subject,  for  it  appears  that  the  inspired  penmen  were  as 
free  and  independent  in  searching  for  facts  and  arranging  them  in 
orderly  narrative  as  they  were  in  the  choice  of  AVords.  (Luke  i,  3.) 
It  seems  better,  therefore,  to  understand  that,  by  the  inspiring  im- 
pulse from  God,  all  the  faculties  of  the  human  agent  Avere  mightily 
quickened,  and,  as  a  consequence,  his  thoughts,  his  emotions,  his 
style,  and  even  his  words,  Avere  affected.  In  this  sense  only  Ave 
affirm  the  doctrine  of  verbal  inspiration.  We  have  seen  above,' 
that  for)n  and  style  are  often  essential  elements  of  an  organic  whole, 
and  to  attempt  to  give  the  sentiment,  Avithout  the  form,  of  some 
compositions,  is  to  rob  them  of  their  very  substance  and  lile.^ 

*  See  on  pages  92-94. 

2  Tayler  Lewis  remarks  that  "the  very  words,  the  very  figures  outwardly  used,  yea, 
the  etymological  metaphors  contained  in  the  words,  be  they  ever  so  interior,  are  all  m- 
spired.  Tlu'v  arc  nf)t  merely  goncrul  effects,  in  whieli  sense  all  humai:  utterances,  and 
even  all  physical  manifestations,  may  be  said  to  be  inspired,  but  the  specially  designed 
products  of  emotions  supernaturally  inbreathed,  tliese  becoming  outward  in  thnnghts, 
and  these,  again,  having  their  ultimate  outward  forms  in  iiwrch  and  fr/urcs  as  truly 
designed  in  the  workings  of  this  chain,  and  thus  as  truly  inspired,  as  the  thoughts  of 
which  these  words  are  the  express  image,  and  the  inspired  emotions  in  which  both 
thoughts  and  images  luid  their  birth."     And  yet  he  repudiates  "that  extreme  view  of 


BIBLICAL    IIERMENEUTICS.  I45 

Four  different  kinds  or  degrees  of  inspiration  are  thus  specified 
by  an  English  author :  "  By  the  inspiration  of  suqaes- 

.         .  1  .        .  S-     1        TT   ,      ^  .   ■      ^O"'"     degrees 

tion  IS  meant  such  communications  or  the  Holy  Spirit  of  inspiration 
as  suggested  and  dictated  every  part  of  the  trutlis  dt^-  ^"S'^'^ted. 
livered.  The  inspiration  of  direction  is  meant  of  such  assistance  as 
left  the  writers  to  describe  the  matter  revealed  in  their  own  way, 
directing  only  the  mind  in  the  exercise  of  its  powers.  The  inspira- 
tion of  elevation  added  a  greater  strength  and  vigour  to  the  efforts 
of  the  mind  than  the  writers  could  have  otherwise  attained.  The 
inspiration  of  super intendency  was  that  watchful  care  which  pre- 
served generally  from  any  thing  being  put  down  derogatory  to  the 
revelation  with  which  it  was  connected.'"  But,  if  God  directly 
suggests,  directs,  elevates,  and  superintends  in  any  or  all  of  these 
ways,  how  can  we  consistently  maintain  that  he  was  concerned 
merely  with  the  substance  and  not  the  form?  Is  it  unworthy  of 
the  God  who  observes  the  fall  of  every  sparrow,  and  numbers  all 
the  hairs  of  our  heads  (Matt,  x,  29,  30),  to  care  for  the  words  and 
forms  in  which  his  oracles  are  given  to  the  world? 

But  while  the  particular  words  and  style  are  essential  elements 
of  some  parts  of  Scripture,  it  should  be  observed  Facts  may  be 
that  there  are  many  facts  and  ideas  which  may  be  ex-  ^'^P^f^'^f  ^^ ^ 

•'  -^  variety  of  words 

pressed  m  a  variety  of  forms.  Thus,  Jesus  might  have  and  forms. 
said:  "A  certain  man,  in  going  from  Jerusalem  to  Jericho,  fell 
among  thieves;"  or,  "There  was  a  man  who  went  on  a  journey 
from  Jerusalem  down  to  Jericho-,  and  robbers  fell  upon  him  by  the 
way;"  or,  "In  passing  from  Jerusalem  down  to  Jericho  a  certain 
traveller  was  assaulted  by  a  band  of  robbers."  We  might  thus 
vary  the  form  and  words  of  the  statement  in  a  score  of  ways,  and 
yet  preserve  substantially  the  same  idea.  But  even  ih  such  matters 
of  little  or  no  apparent  moment,  why  deny  that  the  sui^ervising 
Spirit  aided  in  the  selection  of  the  particular  language  used  by  the 
sacred  writers? 

It  is  possible  to  make  some  of  the  grandest  truths  appear  ludi- 
crous by  resolving  them,   through    an  artful  analysis,   ^  „    . 

•'.  »„.  .  .  Fallacious  trl- 

into  a  multitude    of   frivolous  details.      It   might   be   fling  with  de- 
asked.  Did  the  Almighty  and  Eternal  God  move  the   ^^^^^' 
muscles  of  Matthew's  arm  and  fingers,  cause  his  heart  to  beat  with 

verbal  inspiration  v*fhich  regards  the  sacred  penmen  as  mere  amanuenses,  writing 
words  and  painting  figures  dictated  to  them  by  a  power  and  an  intelligence  acting  in  a 
manner  wholly  extraneous  to  the  laws  of  their  own  spirits,  except  so  far  as  those  laws 
are  merely  physical  or  mechanical."  The  Divine  Human  in  the  Scriptures,  pp.  27-30. 
'  Bishop  Daniel  Wilson,  on  The  Evidences  of  Christianity,  vol.  i,  p.  508.  Lond., 
1828. 
10 


146  INTRODUCTION   TO 

emotion,  and  his  eyes  to  glow,  as  he  took  up  his  pen  and  scratched 
upon  the  parchment  before  him?  Did  he  move  him  to  spell  /lavtd, 
or  Aafild;  to  write  ovro,  or  ovru)g;  elfre,  or  etTrev;  6td  rl,  or  didri', 
el  ye,  or  ei'ye.^  Did  he  furnish  him  with  black  ink  or  red  ink,  pa- 
pyrus or  parchment,  a  writing  desk  or  the  floor  of  a  room?  We 
may  thus  trifle  also  with  the  minutiae  of  divine  Providence,  but, 
after  all  our  quibbling,  we  must  either  admit  that  the  omniscient 
Spirit  was  cognizant  of  all  these  details,  or  else  say  what  particular 
things  escaped  his  oversight  and  care.  The  argument  which  main- 
tains the  inspiration  of  the  thoughts,  but  not  the  words,  of  Scrip- 
ture, logically  denies  any  particular  providence  in  the  form  and 
style  of  God's  written  word,  and  leaves  the  whole  subject  vague 
and  visionary. 

I'he  opinion  that  divine  inspiration  is  incompatible  with  the  free 
action  and  varied  style  of  the  sacred  writers  seems  to  grow  out  of  a 
false  psychology.  Amid  the  complex  sensations,  jserceptions  and  ac- 
tivities of  the  human  soul  there  is  room  for  the  normal  action  of  both 
divine  and  human  forces.  The  intellect  and  the  affections  may  be 
thoroughly  subject  to  supernatural  power,  while  the  will  remains  free 
in  its  self-conscious  action.  The  divine  inspiration  of  the  sacred 
writers  no  more  interfered,  necessarily,  with  their  jDcrsonal  free- 
dom than  the  calling  and  anointing  of  Cyrus  (Isa.  xlv,  i)  interfered 
No  conflict  be-  with  the  conscious  freedom  and  action  of  that  mon- 
v7ne"anf  iful  ^^'^^^-  ^^oscs  and  Paul  wrote  with  as  much  freedom 
man.  as  Cffisar  and  Bacon;  but  Moses  and  Paul  were,  in  a 

high  and  holy  sense,  chosen  ministers  to  write  a  portion  of  the 
Bible,  and  that  holy  calling  and  work  put  them  in  a  position  as 
superior  to  Cffisar,  and  Bacon,  as  the  Pentateuch  and  the  Epistles 
are  superior  tO  the  Gallic  Wars  and  the  Novum  Organum.  The 
wisdom  and  power  of  God  secured,  without  any  violation  of  indi- 
vidual freedom,  the  writing  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  in  their  orig- 
inal form,  and  preserved  the  writers  from  vital  error.  So  the 
Eternal  Word  was  made  flesh  (John  i,  14),  but  the  divine  nature 
in  the  person  of  Christ  did  not  set  aside  or  nullify  the  perfect 
human  nature  and  freedom  of  the  man  Christ  Jesus.  This  union 
of  the  divine  and  human,  whether  in  the  incarnate  word  or  in 
the  written  word,  is  a  great  mystery,  which  no  human  mind  can 
fathom  or  explain.  But  as  regards  the  inspiration  of  prophets 
and  apostles,  we  may  aftirm  with  Delitzsch:  "The  divine  thoughts 
take  their  way  to  the  Ego  of  the  prophet  through  his  nature. 
They  clothe  themselves  in  popular  human  language,  according  to 
the  prophet's  individual  manner  of  thinking  and  speaking,  and 
they  present  themselves  in  a  form  manifoldly  limited,  according 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  147 

to  the   existing   circumstances   and  the  horizon  of   contemporary 
history." 

"  It  is  inadmissible,"  lie  adds,  "  to  distinguish  between  real  and 
verbal  inspiration  [insjnratio  realis  et  verbaUs).  Sub-  dch tzsch's 
stance  and  form  are  both  the  effect  of  one  divine  act.  '^s^- 
As  the  soul  came  into  existence  when  God  breathed  the  spirit  into 
man,  so  come  into  existence  words  of  divine  nature  and  human 
form  when  God  breathes  thoughts  into  man.  .  .  .  The  act  of  inspir- 
ation should,  and  must,  be  represented  as  an  organic  vital  inter- 
working  of  the  divine  and  human  factor,  without  thereby  jeopard- 
izing the  infallibility  of  the  revealed  truth  written  in  the  Scripture, 
and  the  faithfulness  of  the  fundamental  history  of  redemption  con- 
tained therein  for  all  times.  .  .  .  Scripture  is  no  book  fallen  from 
heaven;  its  origination  is  just  as  much  human  as  divine.  He  who 
is  offended  at  this  sins  against  the  Holy  Spirit,  whose  condescension 
into  humanity  (by  no  means  Docetic)  he  ought  rather  to  admire 
and  praise." ' 

The  fact  that ,  different  writers  vary  in  recording  what  piirports 
to  be  particular  sayings  is  often  urged  as  an  argument  verbal  vana- 
against  divine  inspiration.  The  words  of  Jesus  at  the  tions  not  a  vai- 
Last  SujDper,  and  the  title  on  the  cross,  are  cited  as  against^ divine 
examples.  But  under  all  this  argument  is  the  tacit  inspiration, 
assumption  that  each  of  the  writers  is  aiming  to  give  the  ipsissima 
verba,  whereas,  in  fact,  no  one  of  them  has  given  the  original 
words.  The  ipsissima  verba  were  Aramaic,''  not  Greek;  each 
New  Testament  writer  furnishes  his  own  free  and  independent 
version  of  them,  and  all  report  correctly  the  essential  sentiment 
of  our  Lord.  Who  is  competent  to  say  that  these  very  differ- 
ences were  not  desired  and  directed  by  the  Almighty  Spirit?  Mat- 
thew was  inspired  to  write  the  words,  "Take;  eat"  (xxvi,  26); 
Mark  to  omit  the  word  eat  (xiv,  22)  ;  Luke  to  omit  both  these 
words,  and  write,  "  This  is  my  body  which  for  you  is  given  "  (xxii, 
19);  and  Paul  to  say,  "This  my  body  is,  which  is  for  you"  (1  Cor. 
xi,  24).  The  denial  of  a  divine  purpose  in  these  verbal  differences 
seems  to  involve  a  distrust  of  a  partictilar  divine  providence  in  the 
peculiar  style  and  form  of  the  Scriptures  of  God.  If  we  are  not 
able  always  to  see  a  reason  for  such  verbal  differences,  neither  are 
we  competent  to  say  that  there  was,  and  could  have  been,  no 
reason,  and  no  care  for  them  in  the  divine  mind. 

'  Biblical  Psychology,  part  v,  section  5.  Comp.  Elliott,  A  Treatise  on  the  Inspira- 
tion of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  p.  257.     Edinburgh,  1877. 

'■*  The  very  words  of  our  Lord  are,  doubtless,  given  in  such  instances  as  Talitha 
cumi  (.Mark  v,  41),  Ephpliatha  (vii,  34),  liabboni  (John  xx,  16). 


148  INTRODUCTION  TO 

The  thousands  of  various  readings  in  the  ancient  manuscripts, 
and  the  impossibility  of  decidinir,  in  all  cases,  what  is  the  true 
Various  read-  oriijinal  text,  are  construed  into  an  argument  against 
ings  no  valid   yej-jjal  inspiration.     If  God  took  pains  to  influence  the 

argument  '  ^  -,    r 

against  the  ver-  writers  in  the  choice  of  words  and  forms  of  thought, 
of^  the''"orip^  "^^'^y  ^^^  ^®  ^^^  been  careful  to  secure  every  word  from 
nais.  corruption  and  change  ?      This  question,  however,  as- 

sumes that  God  may  never  create  a  thing  without  miraculously 
preserving  it  intact  forever,  a  proposition  which  we  see  no  good  rea- 
son to  affirm.  It  was  probably  no  more  necessary  to  preserve  all 
the  words  ever  given  by  inspiration  of  God  than  to  record  all  the 
things  which  Jesus  did  (John  xxi,  15);  and  we,  therefore,  deny 
that  the  existing  various  readings  afford  any  valid  evidence  that 
the  original  autographs  were  not  verbally  inspired.  We  may  add 
that  the  denial  of  verbal  inspiration  logically  diminishes  one's  de- 
vout interest  and  zeal  in  the  critical  study  of  the  Scriptures.  It 
takes  away  notable  motives  for  anxiety  to  ascertain  the  exact 
words  of  the  original  text,  for  if  those  words  were. not  divinely  in- 
spired we  would  naturally  attach  less  importance  to  them.' 

But  the  vast  majority  of  readers  of  the  Bible  know  nothing  of 
the  original  texts,  and  are  dependent  upon  a  translation  ;  of  what 
benefit,  it  is  asked,  is  verbal  inspiration  to  such  readers?  But  is 
not  every  such  dependent  reader  anxious  to  have  the  most  faithful 
translation  possible?  Why  such  care?  Why  have  hundreds  of 
devout  scholars  combined  to  produce  an  accurate  and  trustworthy 
version  for  the  English-speaking  world  ?  Does  it  not  all  spring 
from  a  feeling  that  the  original  is  divine,  and  the  ultimate  source 
of  all  appeal?  How  irrelevant  and  fallacious  is  it,  then,  to  talk  of 
versions?  The  question  of  inspiration  is  concerned  solely  with  the 
original  texts.  Moreover,  if  there  was  a  divine  plan  and  purpose 
in  having  the  Scriptures  written  in  Hebrew,  and  Chaldee,  and 
Greek,^  the  divine  providence  would  be  likely  to  have  cared  for 
every  jot  and  tittle  of  the  same. 

As  for  alleged  discrepancies,  contradictions,  and  errors  of  the 

'"This  theory,"  says  Gilbert  Haven,  "cuts  tlie  nerves  of  minute  study  for  the  har- 
monizing of  the  Word.  It  is  as  fatal  to  sound  scholarship  as  to  sound  doctrine. 
That  scholars  and  tiioologians  advocate  it  is  no  jiroof  of  its  real  effects.  They  bring 
with  them  to  their  investigation,  not  their  theory,  but  the  old,  the  divine  feeling  of 
its  entire  and  perfect  sacred ness.  They  worship  at  its  shrine,  they  seek  to  know 
its  full  meaning,  its  intended  and  real,  if  hidden,  harmony.  They  are  orthodox  in 
Bpite  of  their  outer  creed,  by  the  inward  culture  of  the  soul  in  the  elder  and  superior 
truth."  Methodist  Quarterly  Review  for  1867,  p.  848.  See  also  Haven's  two  subse- 
quent articles  in  the  same  Review  for  1868. 

*See  above,  pp.  106,  128. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  149 

Bible,  we  deny  that  any  real  errors  can  be  shown.'  But  our  doc- 
trine of  divine  inspiration  is  compatible  with  incorrect  inaccurate 
spelling^,  involved  rhetoric,  imperfect  grammar,  and  in-   grammar   anrj 

,  ^   ,  rni  1  1  •  ^1        Obscurity  Of 

elegant  language.  Ihe  earthen  vessels  remain  earth-  style  no  vaiiu 
en  though  filled  with  divine  treasure.  Confusion  objection. 
of  thought  and  obscurity  of  statement  are  no  valid  argument 
against  the  inspiration  of  the  Word.  As  some  of  God's  purposes 
may  sometimes  be  most  effectually  carried  out  by  weak  or  igno- 
rant men,  so  the  apparent  defects,  alleged  of  some  portions  of  the 
Scriptures,  may  have  been  divinely  permitted  among  the  definite 
purposes  of  grace.*  A  prophecy  oi-  an  epistle  written  "  not  with 
excellency  of  speech  or  of  wisdom  " — "  not  with  persuasive  words 
of  man's  wisdom  " — may,  nevertheless,  contain  a  wisdom  and  excel- 
lence "  not  of  this  world,  nor  of  the  rulers  of  this  world,  who  come 
to  nought"  (1  Cor.  ii,  1,  4,  6).  Faultless  grammar  and  absolute 
accuracy  of  statement  were  not  essential  to  the  best  mode  of  set- 
ting forth  all  the  lessons  of  redemption.  No  more  was  it  essential 
that  the  New  Testament  should  be  written  in  the  classic  elegance 
and  purity  of  ancient  Attic  Greek.-  The  notion  that  divine  inspii-a- 
tion  is  incompatible  with  obscurity  of  style  and  grammatical  inac- 
curacy springs  from  an  a  ])rior%  judgment  that  God  must  needs 
have  given  his  infallible  word  in  some  absolutely  perfect  or  super- 
natural form.  But  such  a  judgment  has  no  foundation  in  nature  or 
in  grace.  God  gave  not  his  word  in  the  tongues  of  angels,  but  of 
men.  "  God  chose  the  foolish  things  of  the  world  that  he  might  put 
the  wise  to  shame;  and  God  chose  the  weak  things  of  the  world  that 
he  might  put  to  shame  the  things  which  are  strong;  and  the  base 
things  of  the  world,  and  the  things  which  are  despised,  did  God 
choose,  and  the  things  which  are  not,  that  he  might  bring  to 
nought  things  that  are;  that  no  flesh  should  glory  before  God" 
(1  Cor.  i,  27-29).  How  futile,  then,  are  all  a  priori  human  judg- 
ments of  the  form  in  which  God's  oracles  should  be  cast  ? 

In  the  seventh  chapter  of  Acts  we  have  the  celebrated  address  of 
the  proto-martyr  Stephen.  His  face  glowing  like  the  gfgpjjgjj.g  ad- 
face  of  an  angel,  and  his  impassioned  soul  full  of  the  dress  in  Acts 
Holy  Spirit,  he  utters  a  rapid  sketch  of  Israelitish  liis- 


Vll. 


'  We  devote  a  chapter,  in  the  subsequent  part  of  this  work,  to  alleged  discrepan- 
cies, and  cannot  enlarge  upon  them  here.  But  comp.  the  article,  Discrepancy  and  In- 
spiration not  Incompatible,  Journal  of  Sacred  Literature  for  April,  1854,  pp.  71-110. 

^  How  often  has  the  personal  Christian  experience  of  an  illiterate  convert,  uttered 
in  broken  speech  and  stammering  voice,  but  glowing  with  the  ardour  of  deep  convic- 
tions, proved  more  mighty  to  awaken  sinful  men,  and  lead  them  to  repentance,  than 
the  most  finished  sermons  of  many  an  eloquent  preacher ! 


15d  INTRODUCTION  TO 

torv.  In  verse  16  he  speaks  of  the  tomb  at  Shechem  "which 
Abraham  bought  for  a  sum  of  money  of  the  sons  of  Emmor,  of 
Sliechem."  Here  is,  apparently,  a  confusion  of  thought,  but  one 
which  could  do  no  possible  harm,  and  did  not  hinder  the  speech 
from  cutting  the  hearers  to  the  heart  (verse  54).  It  seems  to  us 
improbable  that  Stephen  should  have  made  such  a  blunder ; '  but 
there  is  no  evidence  that  the  text  is  corrupt;  and  who  knows  but 
the  Holy  Spirit  allowed  him  in  his  fervid  eloquence  to  fall  into  this 
confusion  of  facts  in  order  to  exhibit  how  irresistible  plenary  in- 
spiration is  not  conditioned  "in  the  wisdom  of  men,  but  in  the 
power  of  God"  (1  Cor.  ii,  5)? 

We  have  no  room  to  discuss  the  manifold  collateral  questions 
connected  with  this  theme,  but  have  briefly  presented  the  main 
points,  which  show  both  the  divine  and  the  Imman  in  the  written 
Word.  We  adopt  no  technical  theory,  but  indicate  how  all  is  di- 
vine, and  all  is  human.  For  "all  scriptuke  is  God-breathed." 
"  Given  by  the  divine  mind,"  says  Tayler  Lewis,  "  these  holy 
books  must  have  in  them  a  depth  and  fulness  of  meaning  that  the 
human  intellect  can  never  exhaust.  If  they  are  holy  books,  if  they 
are  Sacrce  Scriptxiroi^  as  even  the  neologist  conventionally  styles 
thrni,  then  can  there  be  thrown  away  upon  them  no  amount  of 
study,  provided  that  study  is  ever  chastened  by  a  sanctified,  truth- 
loving  spiint  that  rejoices  more  in  the  simplest  teaching,  and  in 
the  simplest  method  of  teaching  from  God,  than  in  the  most  lauded 
discoveries  of  any  mere  human  science.  Is  it  in  truth  the  word 
of  God — is  it  really  God  speaking  to  us?  Then  the  feeling  and 
the  conclusion  which  it  necessitates  are  no  hyperboles.  We  can- 
not go  too  far  in  our  reverence,  or  in  our  expectation  of  knowl- 
edge surpassing  in  kind,  if  not  in  extent.  The  wisdom  of  the 
earth,  of  the  seas,  of  the  treasures  hidden  in  the  rocks  and  all 
deep  places  of  the  subterranean  world,  or  of  the  stars  afar  off, 
brings  us  not  so  nigh  the  central  truth  of  the  heavens,  the  very 
mind  and  thought  of  God,  as  one  parable  of  Christ,  or  one  of  those 
grand  prophetic  figures  through  which  the  light  of  the  infinite  idea 
is  converged,  wliile,  at  the  same  time,  its  intensity  is  shaded  for  the 
tender  human  vision."" 

'  It  is  not  at  all  impossible  that  a  purchase  similar  to  that  recorded  of  Jacob  (Oen. 
xxxiii,  r.i)  IkkI  l)oeii  made  long  iircviously  by  Abrani  when  he  tiist  arrived  at  She- 
chem, and  found  the  Canaanite  already  in  that  land  (Gen.  xii,  6).  An  aboriginal 
Hamor  had  probably  already  founded  the  city  of  Shechem,  and  was  known  as  its  fa- 
ther (fomp.  .Tiidg.  ix,  2S). 

^The  Divine  Human  in  the  Scriptures,  pp.  25,  26. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  151 


CHAPTER  IX. 

QUALIFICATIONS    OF     AN     INTERPRETER. 

In  order  to  be  a  capable'  and  correct  interpreter  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  one  needs  a  variety  of  qualifications,  both  natural  and 
acquired.  For  though  a  large  proportion  of  the  sacred  volume  is 
sufficiently  simple  for  the  child  to  understand,  and  the  common 
people  and  the  unlearned  may  find  on  every  page  much  that  is 
profitable  for  instruction  in  righteousness,  there  is  also  much  that 
reqiiires,  for  its  proper  ajiprehension  and  exposition,  the  noblest 
powers  of  intellect  and  the  most  ample  learning.  The  several 
qualifications  of  a  competent  interpreter  may  be  classified  as  Intel- 
lectual, Educational,  and  Spiritual.  The  first  are  largely  native  to 
the  soul ;  the  second  are  acquired  by  study  and  reseai'chj  the  third 
may  be  regarded  both  as  native  and  acquired. 

Intellectual  Qualifications. 

First  of  all,  the  interpreter  of  S<:'ripture,  and,  indeed,  of  any  other 

book,  should  have  a  sound,  well-balanced  mind.     For  ^  ,   ^. 

'  _  '  ,  Defective  men- 

dulness  of  apprehension,  defective  judgment,  and  an  tai  powera  dis- 
extravagant  fancy  will  pervert  one's  reason,  and  i^^^^'^^- 
lead  to  many  vain  and  foolish  notions.  The  faculties  of  the  mind 
are  capable  of  discipline,  and  may  be  trained  to  a  very  high  degree 
of  perfection ;  but  some  men  inherit  peculiar  tendencies  of  intellect. 
Some  are  gifted  with  rare  powers  of  imagination,  but  are  utterly 
wanting  in  the  critical  faculty.  A  lifetime  of  discipline  will  scarce- 
ly restrain  their  exuberant  fancy.  Others  are  naturally  given  to 
form  hasty  judgments,  and  will  rush  to  the  wildest  extremes.  In 
others,  peculiar  tastes  and  passions  warp  the  judgment,  and  some 
seem  to  be  constitutionally  destitute  of  common  sense.  Any  and 
all  such  mental  defects  disqualify  one  for  the  interpretation  of  the 
word  of  God. 

A  ready  perception  is  specially  requisite  in  the  interpreter.  He 
must  have  the  power  to  grasp  the  thought  of  his  au-  Quick  and  clear 
thor,  and  take  in  at  a  glance  its  full  force  and  bearing,  perception. 
With  such  ready  perception  there  must  be  united  a  breadth  of  view 
and  clearness  of  understanding  which  will  be  quick  to  catch,  not 
only  the  import  of  words  and  phrases,  but  also  the  drift  of  the 
'  Comp.  the  import  of  Uavoi,  iKavoTTj^,  and  iKuvucjev  in  2  Cor.  iii,  5,  6. 


152  INTRODUCTION  TO 

argument.  Thus,  for  example,  in  attempting  to  explain  tlie  Epistle 
to  the  Galatians,  a  quick  perception  will  note  the  apologetic  tone 
of  the  first  two  chapters,  the  bold  earnestness  of  Paul  in  asserting 
the  divine  authority  of  his  apostleship,  and  the  far-reaching  conse- 
quences of  his  claim.  It  will  also  note  how  forcibly  the  personal 
incidents  referred  to  in  Paul's  life  and  ministry  enter  into  his  argu- 
ment. It  will  keenly  appreciate  the  impassioned  appeal  to  the 
"  foolish  Galatians  "  at  the  beginning  of  chapter  third,  and  the  nat- 
ural transition  from  thence  to  the  doctrine  of  Justification.  The 
variety  of  argument  and  illustration  in  the  third  and  fourth  chap- 
ters, and  the  hortatory  application  and  practical  counsels  of  the  two 
concluding  chapters  will  also  be  clearly  discerned;  and  then  the 
unity,  scope,  and  directness  of  the  whole  Epistle  will  lie  pictured 
before  the  mind's  eye  as  a  perfect  whole,  to  be  appreciated  more 
and  more  fully  as  additional  attention  and  study  are  given  to  min- 
uter details. 

The  jxreat  exegetes  have  been  noted  for  acuteness  of  intellect,  a 
Acuteness  of  critical  sharpness  to  discern  at  once  the  connexion  of 
Intellect.  thought,  and  the  association  of  ideas.     This  qualifica- 

tion is  of  great  importance  to  every  interpreter.  He  must  be  quick 
to  see  what  a  j^assage  does  not  teach,  as  well  as  to  comprehend  its 
real  import.  His  critical  acumen  should  be  associated  with  a  mas- 
terly power  of  analysis,  in  order  that  he  may  clearly  discern  all  the 
parts  and  relations  of  a  given  Avhole.  Bengel  and  De  Wette,  in 
their  works  on  the  New  Testament,  excel  in  this  particular.  They 
evince  an  intellectual  sagacity,  which  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  special 
gift,  an  inborn  endowment,  rather  than  a  result  of  scientific  culture. 

The  strong  intellect  will  not  be  destitute  of  imaginative  power. 
Imagination  Many  things  in  narrative  description  must  be  left  to  be 
musfbe  coll-  f^iipplied,  and  many  of  the  finest  passages  of  Holy  Writ 
trolled.  cannot  be  appreciated  by  an  unimaginative  mind.     The 

true  interpreter  must  often  transport  himself  into  the  past,  and 
picture  in  his  soul  the  scenes  of  ancient  time.  He  must  have  an  in- 
tuition of  nature  and  of  human  life  by  which  to  put  himself  in  the 
place  of  the  biblical  writers  and  see  and  feel  as  they  did.  But  it 
has  usually  happened  that  men  of  powerful  imagination  have  been 
unsafe  expositors.  An  exuberant  fancy  is  apt  to  run  awav  with 
the  judgment,  and  introduce  conjecture  and  speculation  in  place  of 
valid  exegesis.  The  chastened  and  disciplined  imagination  will  as- 
sociate with  itself  the  power  of  conception  and  of  abstract  thought, 
and  be  able  to  construct,  if  called  for,  working  hypotheses  to  be 
used  in  illustraticm  or  in  argument.  Sometimes  it  may  be  expe- 
dient to  form  a  concept,  or  adopt  a  theory,  merely  for  the  purpose 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  153 

of  pursuing  some  special  line  of  discussion  ;  and  every  expositor 
should  be  competent  for  this  when  needed. 

But,  above  all  things,  an  interpreter  of  Scripture  needs  a  sound 
and  sober  judgment.  His  mind  must  be  competent  to  gQ^jgr  judg- 
aiialyze,  examine,  and  compare.  Pie  must  not  allow  '^'^'i''- 
himself  to  be  influenced  by  hidden  meanings,  and  spiritualizing 
processes,  and  plausible  conjectures.  He  must  weigh  reasons  for 
and  against  a  given  interpretation;  he  must  judge  whether  his 
principles  are  tenable  and  self-consistent;  he  must  often  balance 
probabilities,  and  reach  conclusions  with  the  greatest  caution.  Such 
a  discriminating  judgment  may  be  trained  and  strengthened,  and 
no  pains  should  be  spared  to  render  it  a  safe  and  reliable  habit  of 
the  mind. 

Correctness  and  delicacy  of  taste  will-  be  the  result  of  a  discrimi- 
nating judgment.  The  interpreter  of  the  inspired  vol-  correct  and  dei- 
urae  will  find  tlie  need  of  this  qualification  in  discerning  icatu  taste. 
the  manifold  beauties  and  excellences  scattered  in  rich  profusion 
through  its  pages.  But  his  taste,  as  well  as  his  judgment,  must  be 
trained  to  discern  between  the  true  and  the  false  ideals.  Many  a 
modern  Avhim  of  shallow  refinement  is  offended  with  the  straiiiht- 
forward  honesty  and  simplicity  of  the  ancient  world.  Prurient 
sensitiveness  often  blushes  before  expressions  in  the  Script uies 
which  are  as  far  as  possible  removed  from  impurity.  Correct  t;:sle 
in  such  cases  will  pronounce  according  to  the  real  spirit  of  tl  e 
writer  and  his  age. 

The  use  of  reason  in  the  interpretation  of  Scripture  is  every- 
wliere  to  be  assumed.     The  Bible  comes  to  us  in  the 

UsG  of  rctisou. 

forms  of  human  language,  and  appeals  to  our  reason 
and  judgment;  it  invites  investigation,  and  condemns  a  blind  cre- 
dulity. It  is  to  be  interpreted  as  we  interpret  any  other  volume, 
by  a  rigid  application  of  the  same  laws  of  language,  and  the  same 
grammatical  analysis.  Even  in  passages  which  may  be  said  to  lie 
beyond  the  ])i"Ovince  of  reason,  in  the  realm  of  supernatural  revela- 
tion, it  is  still  competent  for  the  rational  judgment  to  say  whether, 
indeed,  the  revelation  be  supernatural.  In  matters  beyond  its  range 
of  vision,  reason  may,  by  valid  argument,  explain  its  own  incom- 
petency, and  by  analogy  and  manifold  suggestion  show  that  there 
are  many  things  beyond  its  province  which  are  nevertheless  true 
and  righteous  altogether,  and  to  be  accepted  without  dispute. 
Reason  itself  may  thus  become  efficient  in  strengthening  faith  in 
the  unseen  and  eternal. 

But  it  behooves  the  expounder  of  God's  word  to  see  that  all  his 
principles  and  processes  of  reasoning  are  sound  and  self-consistent. 


154  INTRODUCTION   TO 

He  must  not  commit  himself  to  false  premises;  he  must  ahstain 
from  confusing  dilemmas ;  he  must  especially  refrain  from  rushing 
to  unwarranted  conclusions.  Nor  must  he  ever  take  for  granted 
things  which  are  doubtful,  or  open  to  serious  question.  All  such 
logical  fallacies  will  necessarily  vitiate  his  expositions,  and  make 
him  a  dangerous  guide.  The  right  use  of  reason  in  biblical  exposi- 
tion is  seen  in  the  cautious  procedure,  the  sound  principles  adopted, 
the  valid  and  conclusive  argumentation,  the  sober  sense  displayed, 
and  the  honest  integrity  and  self-consistency  everywhere  main- 
tained. Such  exercise  of  reason  Mill  always  commend  itself  to  the 
godly  conscience  and  the  pure  heart. 

In  addition  to  the  above-mentioned  qualifications,  the  interpreter 
should  be  "apt  to  teach"  (diSaKTiKog,  2  Tim,  ii,  24). 
p  0  eac  .  jj^  niust  not  only  be  able  to  understand  the  Scriptures, 
but  also  to  set  forth  in  clear  and  lively  form  to  others  what  he 
himself  comprehends.  Without  such  aptness  in  teaching,  all  his 
other  gifts  and  qualities  will  avail  little  or  nothing.  Accordingly, 
the  interpreter  should  cultivate  a  clear  and  simple  style,  and  study 
to  bring  out  the  truth  and  force  of  the  inspired  oracles  so  that 
others  will  readily  understand. 

Educational  Qualifications. 

The  professional  interpreter  of  Scripture  needs  more  than  a  well- 
balanced  mind,  discreet  sense,  and  acuteness  of  intellect.  He  needs 
stores  of  information  in  the  broad  and  varied  fields  of  history, 
science,  and  philosophy.  By  many  liberal  studies  will  his  faculties 
become  disciplined  and  strong  for  practical  use ;  and  extensive  and 
accurate  knowledge  will  furnish  and  fit  him  to  be  the  teacher  of 
others.    The  biblical  interpreter  should  be  minutely  acquainted  with 

the  geography  of  Palestine  and  the  adiacent  retrions. 
Geography.         ,  i     \,     i  i  i    •      .i  •      i  •,,  -. 

In  order  to  be  properly  versed  in  this,  he  will  need  to 

understand  the  physical  character  of  the  world  outside  of  Bible 

lands.     For,  though  the  sacred  writers  may  have  known  nothing  of 

countries  foreign  to  Asia,  Africa,  and  Europe,  the  modern  student 

will  find  an  advantage  in  having  information,  as  full  as  possible,  of 

the  entire  surface  of  the  globe.     With  such  geographical  knowledge 

he  should  also  unite  a  familiar  acquaintance  with  uni- 

History 

versal  history.  The  records  of  many  jjeoples,  both  an- 
cient and  modern,  will  often  be  of  value  in  testing  the  accuracy  of 
the  sacred  Avriters,  and  illustrating  their  excellence  and  Morth. 
AVhat  a  vast  amount  of  light  have  ancient  authors,  and  the  deci- 
phered inscriptions  of  Egypt,  Assyria,  Babylon,  and  Persia,  shed 
upon  the  narratives  of  the  Bible  I 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  155 

The  science  of  chronology  is  also  indisjDensable  to  the  proper  in- 
terpretation of  the  Scriptures.     The  succession  of  events, 
the  division  of  the  ages  into  great  eras,  the  scoj^e  of  gen-       rono.ogy. 
ealogical  tables,  and  the  fixing  of  dates,  are  important,  and  call 
for  patient  study  and  laborious  care.     Nor  can  the  interpreter  dis- 
pense with  the  study  of  antiquities,  the  habits,  customs, 
and  arts  of  the  ancients.     He  should  inquire  into  the  an-       ^  '*^^^  ^^^* 
tiquities  of  all  the  ancient  nations  and  races  of  whom  any  records 
remain,  for  the  customs  of  other  nations  may  often  throw  light 
upon  those  of  the  Hebrews.     The  study  of  politics,  in- 
cluding international  law  and  the  various  theories  and 


& 


systems  of  civil  government,  will  add  greatly  to  the  other  accom- 
plishments of  the  exegete,  and  enable  him  the  better  to  appreciate 
the  Mosaic  legislation,  and  the  great  principles  of  civil  government 
set  forth  in  the  New  Testament.  Many  a  passage,  also,  can  be  illus- 
trated and  made  more  impressive  by  a  thorough  knowledge  of  natu- 
ral science.  Geology,  mineralogy,  and  astronomy,  are  Natural  sci- 
incidentally  touched  by  statements  or  allusions  of  the  sa-  ence. 
cred  writers,  and  whatever  the  knowledge  of  the  ancients  on  these 
subjects,  the  modern  interpreter  ought  to  be  familiar  with  what 
modern  science  has  demonstrated.     The  same  may  be  said  of  the 

history  and  systems  of  speculative  thought,  the  various 

.  o      '  Philosophy, 

schools  of  philosophy  and  psychology.     Many  of  these 

philosophical  discussions  have  become  involved  in  theological  dog- 
ma, and  have  led  to  peculiar  principles  and  methods  of  interpreta- 
tion, and,  to  cope  fairly  with  them,  the  professional  exegete  should 
be  familiar  with  all  their  subtleties.  We  have  already  seen  how 
all-important  to  the  interpreter  is  a  profound  and  accu-  The  sacred 
rate  knowledge  of  the  sacred  tongues.  No  one  can  be  a  tongues, 
master  in  biblical  exposition  without  such  knowledge.  To  a  thor- 
ough acquaintance  with  Hebrew,  Chaldee,  and  Greek,  he  should 
add  some  proficiency  in  the  science  of  comparative  phi-  comparative 
lology.  Especially  will  a  knowledge  of  Syriac,  Arabic,  puiioiogy. 
and  other  Semitic  languages  help  one  to  understand  the  Hebrew 
and  the  Chaldee,  and  acquaintance  with  Sanskrit  and  Latin  and 
other  Indo-European  tongues  will  deepen  and  enlarge  one's  knowl- 
edge of  the  Greek.  To  all  these  acquirements  the  interpreter  of 
God's  word  should  add  a  familiar  acquaintance  with  gen-  Genera:  lit- 
eral literature.  The  great  productions  of  human  genius,  erature. 
the  world-renowned  epics,  the  classics  of  all  the  great  nations,  and 
the  bibles  of  all  religions,  will  be  of  value  in  estimating  the  oracles 
of  God. 

It  is  not  denied  that  there  have  been  able  and  excellent  exposi- 


156  INTRODUCTION  TO 

tors  who  were  wanting  in  many  of  these  literary  qualifications. 
But  he  who  excels  as  a  master  can  regai'd  no  literary  attainments 
as  superfluous;  and,  in  maintaining  and  defending  against  scepti- 
cism and  infidelity  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints,  the 
Christian  apologist  and  exegete  will  find  all  these  qualifications  in- 
dispensable. 

Spiritual  Qualifications. 

Intellectual  qualities,  though  capable  of  development  and  disci- 
Partiy  a  gift,  pline,  are  to  be  regarded  as  natural  endowments;  edu- 
partiy  acquired,  cational  or  literary  acquirements  are  to  be  had  only  by 
diligent  and  faithful  study;  but  those  qualifications  of  an  inter- 
preter which  we  call  spiritual  are  to  be  regarded  as  partly  a  gift, 
and  partly  acquired  by  personal  effort  and  pro^Jer  discipline.  Under 
this  head  we  place  all  moral  and  religious  qualities,  dispositions, 
and  attainments.  The  spirit  is  that  higher  moral  nature  which 
especially  distinguishes  man  from  the  brute,  and  renders  him  capa- 
ble of  knowing  and  loving  God.  To  meet  the  wants  of  this  spirit- 
ual nature  the  Bible  is  admirably  adapted;  but  the  perverse  heart 
and  carnal  mind  may  refuse  to  entertain  the  thoughts  of  God. 
"  The  natural  man,"  says  Paul,  "  does  not  receive  the  things  of  the 
Spirit  of  God,  for  they  are  a  folly  to  him,  and  he  is  not  able  to 
know,  because  they  are  spiritually  discerned  "  (1  Cor.  ii,  14). 

First  of  all,  the  true  interpreter  needs  a  disposition  to  seek  and 
Desire  to  know  know  the  truth.  No  man  can  properly  enter  upon  the 
the  truth.  study  and  exposition  of  what  purports  to  be  the  reve- 

lation of  God  while  his  heart  is  influenced  by  any  prejudice  against 
it,  or  hesitates  for  a  moment  to  accept  what  commends  itself  to  his 
conscience  and  his  judgment.  There  must  be  a  sincere  desire  and 
purpose  to  attain  the  truth,  and  cordially  accept  it  when  attained. 
Such  a  disposition  of  heart,  which  may  be  more  or  less  strong  in 
early  childhood,  is  then  easily  encouraged  and  developed,  or  as 
easily  perverted.  Early  prejudices  and  the  natural  tendency  of 
tlie  liuman  soul  to  run  after  that  which  is  evil,  rapidly  beget  habits 
and  dispositions  unfriendly  to  godliness.  "For  the  carnal  mind  is 
enmity  against  God"  (Rom.  viii,  7),  and  readily  cleaves  to  that 
which  seems  to  remove  moral  obligation.  "  Every  one  that  does 
evil  hates  the  light,  and  comes  not  to  the  light  lest  his  deeds  should 
be  reproved"  (John  iii,  20).  A  soul  thus  perverted  is  incompetent 
to  love  and  search  the  Scriptures. 

Tomier  uiicc-  ^  1'"'"^  desire  to  know  the  truth  is  enhanced  by  a  ten- 
•■'on-  der  affection  for  whatever  is  morally   ennobling.     The 

writhigs  of  John  abound  in  passages  of  tender  feeling,  and  suggest 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  157 

how  deep  natures  like  his  possess  an  intuition  of  godliness.  Their 
souls  yearn  for  the  pure  and  the  good,  and  they  exult  to  find  it  all 
in  God.  Such  tender  aflfection  is  the  seat  of  all  pure  love,  whether 
of  God  or  of  man.  The  characteristic  utterance  of  such  a  soul  is: 
"Beloved,  let  us  love  one  another;  because  love  is  of  God,  and 
every  one  that  loves  has  been  begotten  of  God,  and  knows  God. 
.  .  .  God  is  love;  and  he  that  abides  in  love  abides  in  God,  and  God 
in  hira"  (1  John  iv,  7,  16). 

The  love  of  the  truth  should  be  fervent  and  glowing,  so  as  to  be- 
get in  the  soul  an  enthusiasm  for  the  word  of  God.  Enthusiasm  for 
The  mind  that  truly  appreciates  the  Homeric  poems  the  word. 
must  imbibe  the  spirit  of  Homer.  The  same  is  true  of  him  who 
delights  in  the  magnificent  periods  of  Demosthenes,  the  easy  num- 
bers and  burning  thoughts  of  Shakspeare,  or  the  lofty  verse  of  Mil- 
ton. What  fellowship  with  such  lofty  natures  can  he  have  whose 
soul  never  kindles  with  enthusiasm  in  the  study  of  their  works? 
So  the  j^rofound  and  able  exegete  is  he  whose  spirit  God  has 
touched,  and  whose  soul  is  enlivened  by  the  revelations  of  heaven. 

Such  hallowed  fervour  should  be  chastened  and  controlled  by  a 
true  reverence.  "The  fear  of  Jehovah  is  the  begin-  Reverence  for 
ning  of  knowledge "  (Prov.  i,  7).  There  must  be  the  ^°^- 
devout  frame  of  mind,  as  well  as  the  pure  desire  to  know  the 
truth.  "  God  is  a  Spirit;  and  they  that  worship  him  must  worship 
him  in  spirit  and  in  truth"  (John  iv,  24).  Therefore,  they  who 
would  attain  the  true  knowledge  of  God  must  possess  the  rever- 
ent, truth-loving  spirit;  and,  having  attained  this,  God  will  seek 
them  (John  iv,  23)  and  reveal  himself  to  them  as  he  does  not  unto 
the  world.     Compare  Matt,  xi,  25;  xvi,  17. 

Finally,  the  expounder  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  needs  to  have  liv- 
ing fellowship  and  communion  with  the  Holy  Sj^irit.  communion 
Inasmuch  as  "  all  Scripture  is  God-breathed  "  (2  Tim.  with  the  Holy 
iii,  1 6),  and  the  sacred  writers  spoke  from  God  as  they  ^'" " 
were  moved  by  the  Holy  Spirit  (2  Peter  i,  21),  the  interpreter  of 
Scripture  must  be  a  partaker  of  the  same  Holy  Spirit.  He  must, 
by  a  profound  experience  of  the  soul,  attain  the  saving  knowledge 
of  Christ,  and  in  proportion  to  the  depth  and  fulness  of  that  expe- 
rience he  will  know  the  life  and  peace  of  the  "  mind  of  the  Spirit " 
(Rom.  viii,  6).  "  We  speak  God's  wisdom  in  a  mystery,"  says 
Paul  (1  Cor.  ii,  7-11),  the  hidden  spiritual  wisdom  of  a  divinely 
illuminated  heart,  which  none  of  the  princes  of  this  world  have 
known,  but  (as  it  is  in  substance  written  in  Isa.  Ixiv,  4)  a  wisdom 
relating  to  "  what  things  (a)  eye  did  not  see,  and  ear  did  not  hear, 
and   into  man's  heart  did  not  enter — whatever  things  (ooa)   God 


158  INTRODUCTION, 

prepared  for  them  that  love  him;  for'  to  lis  Gocl  revealed  them 
through  the  Spirit;  for  the  Sj^irit  searches  all  things,  even  the 
depths  of  God.  For  who  of  men  knows  the  things  of  tl\e  man 
except  the  spirit  of  the  man  which  is  in  him  ?  So  also  the  things 
of  God  no  one  knows  except  the  Spirit  of  God."  He,  then,  who 
would  know  and  explain  to  others  "  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  "  (Matt,  xiii,  11)  must  enter  into  blessed' communion  and 
fellowship  with  the  Holy  One.  He  should  never  cease  to  pray 
(Eph.  i,  17,  18)  "that  the  God  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Fa- 
ther of  glory,  would  give  him  the  spirit  of  wisdom  and  of  re^ela- 
tion  in  the  full  knowledge  (eTriyvcjaig)  of  him,  the  eyes  of  his  heart 
being  enlightened  for  the  purpose  of  knowing  what  is  the  hope  of 
his  calling,  what  the  riches  of  the  glory  of  his  inheritance  in  the 
saints,  and  what  the  exceeding  greatness  of  his  power  toward  us 
who  believe." 

'  We  follow  here  the  reading  of  Westcott  and  Hort,  who  receive  yaQ  into  the  text. 
This  reading  has  the  strong  support  of  Codex  B,  and  would  have  been  quite  liable  to 
be  changed  to  the  more  numerously  supported  reading  6e  by  reason  of  a  failure  to 
apprehend  the  somewhat  involved  connection  of  thought.  The  ydg  gives  the  reason 
why  toe  speak  God's  mysterious  wisdom,  for  to  us  God  revealed  it  through  the  Spirit. 


PART  SECOND. 


'9 *- 


PRINCIPLES  OF  BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS. 


We  count  it  no  gentleness  or  fair  dealing,  in  a  man  of  power,  to  require 
strict  and  punctual  ohedience,  and  yet  give  out  his  commands  amhiguously . 
We  should  thinlc  he  had  a  plot  upon  us.  Certainly  such  commands  were  no 
commands,  hut  snares,  (The  very  essence  of  truth  is  plainness  and  hrightness; 
the  darlcness  and  ignorance  are  our  own.  (TTie  wisdom  of  God  created  under- 
standing, fit  and  proportionable  to  truth,  the  ohj'ect  and  end  of  it,  as  the  eye  to 
the  thing  visihle.  If  our  understanding  have  a  film  of  ignorance  over  it,  or 
he  hlear  with  gazing  on  other  false  glistering s, 'what  is  that  to  truth?  Jf  we 
vAll  hut  purge  with  sovereign  eye-salve  that  intellectual  ray  which  Crod  hath 
planted  in  us,  then  we  would  helieve  the  Scriptures  protesting  their  own  plain- 
ness and  perspicuity,  calling  to  them  to  he  instructed,  not  only  the  wise  and 
the  learned,  hut  the  simple,  the  poor,  the  hahes ;  foretelling  an  extraordinary 
effusion  of  Q-od's  Spirit  upon  every  age  and  sect,  attributing  to  all  men  and 
requiring  from  them  the  ability  of  searching,  trying,  examining  all  things,  and 
by  the  Spirit  discerning  that  which  is  good. — Milton. 


PRINCIPLES 


OP 


BIBLICAL  HERMEITEUTICS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

PRELIMINARY. 

The  Principles  of  Biblical  Hermeneutics  are  those  governing  laws 
and  methods  of  procedure  by  which  the  interpreter  de- 

.  i>     1       TT   1      n      •  Hermeneutical 

termmes  the  meaning  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  These  principles  de- 
principles  are  of  the  nature  of  comprehensive  and  fun-  ^"'^'^' 
damental  doctrines.  They  become  to  the  practical  exegete  so  many 
maxims,  postulates,  and  settled  rules.  He  is  supposed  to  hold  them 
in  the  mind  as  axioms,  and  to  apply  them  in  all  his  expositions  with 
uniform  consistency.' 

The  importance  of  establishing  sound  and  trustworthy  principles 
of  biblical  exposition  is  universally  conceded.      For  it   , 

^  ....  .  Importance   of 

is  evident  that  a  false  principle  m  his  method  will  nee-  sound  princi- 
cssarily  vitiate  the  entire  exegetical  process  of  an  inter-  ^^^^^' 
preter.  When  we  find  that  in  the  explanation  of  certain  parts  of 
the  Scriptures  no  two  interi^reters  out  of  a  whole  class  agree,  we 
liave  great  reason  to  presume  at  once  that  some  fatal  error  lurks  in 
their  principles  of  interpretation.  We  cannot  believe  that  the 
sacred  writers  desired  to  be  misunderstood.  They  did  not  write 
with  a  purpose  to  confuse  and  mislead  their  readers.  Nor  is  it 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  Scripture,  given  by  divine  inspira- 
tion, is  of  the  nature  of  a  puzzle  designed  to  exercise  the  ingenuity 
of  critics.  It  was  given  to  make  men  wise  unto  salvation,  and  in 
great  part  it  is  so  direct  and  simple  in  its  teachings  that  a  little 
child  can  understand  its  meaning.  But  the  Bible  contains  some 
riddles  and  dark  sayings,  and  many  revelations  in  the  form  of  types, 
symbols,  parables,  allegories,  visions,  and  dreams,  and  the  intcrpro- 

'  "The  perfect  understanding  of  a  discourse,"  says  Schleiermacher,  "is  a  work  of 
art,  and  involves  the  need  of  au  art-doctrine,  which  we  designate  by  the  term  Her- 
meneutics. Such  an  art-doctrine  has  existence  only  in  so  far  as  the  precepts  admitted 
form  a  system  resting  upon  principles  which  are  immediately  evident  from  the  nature 
of  thought  and  language." — Outline  of  the  Study  of  Theology,"  p.  142.  Edinb.,  1850. 
11 


163  PRINCIPLES   OF 

tation  of  these  has  exerciser!  the  most  gifterl  minds.  IMany  differ- 
ent and  often  contradictory  methods  of  exposition  have  been 
adopted,  and  some  enthusiasts  liave  gone  to  the  extreme  of  affirm- 
ing that  there  are  manifokl  meanings  and  "mountains  of  sense"  in 
every  line  of  Scripture.  Lender  the  spell  of  some  such  fascination 
many  have  been  strangely  misled,  and  have  set  forth  as  expositions 
of  the  Scriptures  their  own  futile  fancies.' 

Sound  hermeneutical  j^rinciples  are,  therefore,  elements  of  safety 
True  metiiod  and  satisfaction  in  the  study  of  God's  Amtten  word. 
of  detejiiiining  jj^^  j^q^^^  j^j.g  g^(,IJ  principles  to  be  ascertained  and  es- 

sound    pnnci-  ^  ^ 

pies.  tablished?     How  may  we  determine  what  is  true  and 

what  is  false  in  the  various  methods  of  exposition?  We  must  go 
to  the  Scriptures  themselves,  and  search  them  in  all  their  parts  and 
forms.  We  miist  seek  to  ascertain  the  principles  which  the  sacred 
writers  followed.  Naked  propositions,  or  formulated  rules  of  in- 
terpretation, will  be  of  little  or  no  worth  unless  supported  and 
illustrated  by  self-verifying  examples.  It  is  Avorthy  of  note  that 
the  Scriptures  furnish  repeated  examples  of  the  formal  interpre- 
tation of  dreams,  visions,  types,  symbols,  and  parables.  In  such 
examples  we  are  especially  to  seek  our  fundamental  and  controlling 
laws  of  exposition.  Unless  we  find  clear  warrant  for  it  in  the  word 
itself,  we  sliould  never  allow  that  any  one  passage  or  sentiment  of 
divine  revelation  has  more  than  one  true  import.  The  Holy  Scrip- 
ture is  no  Delphic  oracle  to  bewilder  and  mislead  the  human  heart 
by  utterances  of  double  meaning.  God's  written  word,  taken  as  a 
whole,  and  allowed  to  speak  for  itself,  will  be  found  to  be  its  own 
best  interpreter. 

The  process  of  observing  the  laws  of  thought  and  language,  as 
Ennobling  tea-  exhibited  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  is  an  ennobling  study. 
menou\iTai  ^^  affords  an  edifying  intercourse  Avith  eminent  and 
study.  choice  spirits  of  the  past,  and  compels  us  for  the  time 

to  lose  sight  of  temporary  interests,  and  to  become  absorbed  with 
the  thouglUs  and  feelings  of  other  ages;  He  who  forms  the  habit 
of  studying  not  only  the  divine  thoughts  of  revelation,  but  also 
the  principles  and  methods  according  to  which  those  thoughts  have 
been  expressed,  Avill  acquire  a  moral  and  intellectual  culture  worthy 
of  the  noblest  ambition. 

•  Lange  suggestively  remarks :  "  As  the  sun  in  the  earthly  heavens  has  to  break 
througli  many  cloudy  media,  so  also  does  the  divine  word  of  Holy  Poripturo  thronuh 
the  confusion  of  every  kind  which  arises  from  the  soil  of  earthly  uituitiou  and  rupr<j- 
tentatiou."     Grundriss  der  biblischcn  Ucrmeneutik,  p.  77. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  163 


CHAPTER  n. 

DIFFERENT    METHODS    OF    INTERPRETATION. 

In  proceding  to  ascertain  the  principles  of  a  valid  and  self-consis- 
tent Scripture  exegesis,  we  do  well  to  knoM^  beforehand  something 
of  the  diver.se  methods  and  systems  of  interpretation  which  have 
been  followed  by  others.  A  brief  survey  of  these  will  be  a  help 
both  in  avoiding  false  principles  and  in  apprehending  the  true. 

The  allegorical  method  of  interpretation  obtained  an  early  prom- 
inence among  the  Jews  of  Alexandria.  Its  origin  is  Allegorical  in- 
usually  attributed  to  the  mingling  of  Greek  philosophy  terpretation. 
and  the  biblical  conceptions  of  God.  Many  of  the  theophanies  and 
anthropomorphisms  of  the  Old  Testament  were  repugnant  to  the 
philosophic  mind,  and  hence  the  effort  to  discover  behind  the  outer 
form  an  inner  substance  of  truth.  The  biblical  narratives  Avere 
often  treated  like  the  Greek  myths,  and  explained  as  either  a  his- 
torical or  an  enigmatical  embodiment  of  moral  and  religious  les- 
sons. The  most  distinguished  representative  of  JeAvish  allegorical 
interpi'etation  was  Philo  of  Alexandi'ia,  and  an  example  of  his  alle- 
gorizing many  be  seen  in  the  following  remarks  on  the  ri\ers  of 
Eden  (Gen.  ii,  10-14): 

In  these  words  Moses  intends  to  slcetch  out  the  parlicniar  virtues. 
And  they,  also,  are  four  in  number,  ])nu"l(nce,  temperance,  courajre,  and 
justice.  Now  the  greatest  river,  from  wliich  the  four  branches  flow  off,  is 
generic  virtue,  whieh  we  have  already  called  goodness;  and  tlie  four 
branches  are  the  same  number  of  virtues.  Generic  virtue,  therefore,  do- 
rives  its  beginning  from  Eden,  which  is  the  wisdon\  of  God  ;  which  re- 
joices, and  exults,  and  triumphs,  being  delighted  at  and  iionoured  on 
account  of  nothing  else,  except  its  Father,  God.  And  tlie  four  particular 
virtues  are  branches  from  the  generic  virtue,  which,  like  a  river,  waters  all 
the  good  actions  of  each  with  an  aliundant  stream  of  benefits. ^ 

Similar  allegorizing  abounds  in  the  early  Christian  fathers.  Thus, 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  commenting  on  the  Mosaic  prohibition  of 
eating  the  swine,  the  hawk,  the  eagle,  and  the  raven,  observes: 
"The  sow  is  the  emblem,  of  voluptu(Ais  and  unclean  lust  of  food. 
.  .  .  The  eagle  indicates  robbery,  the  hawk  injustice,  and  the  raven 
greed."  On  Exod.  xv,  1,  "Jehovah  has  triumphed  gloriously;  the 
horse  and  his  rider  has  he  thrown  into  the  sea,"  Clement  remarks: 
>  The  Allegories  of  the  Sacred  Laws,  book  i,  1 9  (Bohn's  edition). 


164  PRINCIPLES   OP 

The  many-liiuberl  and  brutal  affection,  lust,  with  the  rider  mounted,  who 
gives  the  reins  to  pleasures,  he  casts  into  the  sea — throwing  them  away 
into  the  disorders  of  the  world.  TIuis,  also,  Plato,  in  his  book  on  the  soul 
[Timseus],  says  that  tiie  charioteer  and  the  horse  that  ran  off — (tlie  irra- 
tional part,  which  is  divided  into  two,  into  anger  and  concupiscence) — fall 
down;  and  so  the  myth  intimates  that  it  was  through  the  licentiousness  of 
tlie  steeds  that  Phaethon  was  thrown  out." 

The  allegorical  method  of  interpretation  is  based  upon  a  pro- 
found reverence  for  the  Scriptures,  and  a  desire  to  exhibit  their 
manifold  depths  of  wisdom.  But  it  will  be  noticed  at  once  that 
its  habit  is  to  disregard  the  common  signification  of  words,  and 
give  Aving  to  all  manner  of  fanciful  speculation.  It  does  not  draw- 
out  the  legitimate  meaning  of  an  author's  language,  but  foists  into 
it  Avhatever  the  whim  or  fancy  of  an  interpreter  may  desire.  As 
a  system,  therefore,  it  puts  itself  beyond  all  well-defined  principles 
and  laws. 

Closely  allied  to  the  allegorical  interpretation  is  the  Mystical," 
Mystical  inter-  according  to  which  manifold  depths  and  shades  of  mean- 
pretation.  jng  are  sought  in  every  word  of  Scripture.     The  alle- 

gorical interpreters  have,  accordingly,  very  naturally  run  into  much 
that  is  to  be  classed  v/ith  mystical  theorizing.  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria maintained  that  the  laws  of  Moses  contain  a  fourfold  signif- 
icance, the  natural,  the  mystical,  the  moral,  and  the  prophetical. 
Origen  held  that,  as  man's  nature  consists  of  body,  soul,  and  spirit, 
80  the  Scriptures  have  a  con*esponding  threefold  sense,  the  bodily 
(oujiartKog),  or  literal,  the  psychical  (ipvxiKog)^  or  moral,  and  the 
spiritual  (nvevijaTiKog),  which  latter  lie  further  distinguishes  as  alle- 
gorical, tropological,  and  anagogical.  In  the  early  part  of  the 
ninth  century  the  learned  Rhabanus  Maurus  recommended  four 
methods  of  exposition,  the  historical,  the  allegorical,  the  anagogical, 
and  the  tropological.     He  observes : 

By  these  the  mother  Wisdom  feeds  the  sons  of  her  adoption.  Uiion 
youth  and  tiiose  of  tender  age  s!ie  bestows  drink,  in  the  milk  of  history; 
on  sucii  as  have  made  proficiency  in  faith,  food,  in  the  bread  of  allegory; 
to  the  good,  such  as  strenuously  laliour  in  good  works,  she  gives  a  satisfy- 
ing portion  in  the  savoury  nourishment  of  tropology.  To  those,  in  fine, 
who  have  raised  themselves  jibove  the  conunon  level  of  humanity  by  a  con- 
temi)t  of  earthly  things,  and  liavc  advanced  to  the  highest  by  heavenly 
desires,  she  gives  the  sober  intoxication  of  theoretic  contemplation  in  the 
wine  of  anagogy.  .  ,  .  History,  which  narrates  examples  of  perfect  men, 

'  Miscellanies,  book  v,  chap.  viii. 

'  According  to  Ernesti,  tlie  mystical  interpretation  differs  from  the  allegorical,  as 
among  the  Greeks  ■deupia  differs  from  uJ.Ariyopia.     Institutes,  chap,  ix,  3. 


BIBLICAL   PIERMENEUTICS.  165 

excites  the  reader  to  imitate  tlieir  sanctity;  allegory  excites  him  to  know 
the  trutli  in  the  revelation  of  faith;  tropology  encourages  him  to  the  love 
of  virtue  by  improving  the  morals;  and  anagogy  promotes  the  longinc  after 
eternal  happiness  by  revealing  everlasting  joys.  .  .  .  Since  tlien,  it  appears 
that  these  four  modes  of  understanding  the  Holy  Scriptures  unveil  all  the 
secret  things  in  them,  we  should  consider  when  they  are  to  be  understood 
according  to  one  of  them  only,  when  according  to  two,  when  accordino-  to 
three,  and  when  according  to  all  the  four  together.' 

Among  the  mystical  interpreters  we  may  also  place  the  cele- 
brated Emanuel  Swedenborg,  who  maintains  a  three-  gwedenborffian 
fold  sense  of  Scripture,  according  to  what  he  calls  "  the  interpretation. 
Science  of  Correspondencies."  As  there  are  three  heavens,  a  low- 
est, a  middle,  and  a  highest,  so  there  are  three  senses  of  the  Word, 
the  natural  or  literal,  the  spiritual,  and  the  celestial.     He  says : 

Tile  Word  in  the  letter  is  like  a  casket,  where  lie  in  order  precious  stones, 
pearls,  and  diadems;  and  when  a  man  esteems  the  Word  holy,  and  reads 
it  for  the  sake  of  the  uses  of  life,  the  thoughts  of  his  mind  are,  compara- 
tively, like  one  who  holds  such  a  cabinet  in  his  hand,  and  sends  it  heaven- 
ward ;  and  it  is  opened  in  its  ascent,  and  the  precious  things  therein  come 
to  the  angels,  who  are  deeply  delighted  witli  seeing  and  examining  them. 
This  delight  of  tiie  angels  is  communicated  to  the  man,  and  makes  conso- 
ciation, and  also  a  communication  of  perceptions.^ 

He  explains  the  commandment  "Thou  shalt  not  kill"  (Exod. 
XX,  13),  first,  in  its  natural  sense,  as  foi'bidding  murder  and  also 
the  cherishing  of  hatred  and  revenge ;  secondly,  in  the  spiritual 
sense,  as  forbidding  "to  act  the  devil  and  destroy  a  man's  soul;" 
and  thirdly,  in  the  celestial  or  heavenly  sense,  the  angels  understand 
killing  to  signify  hating  the  Lord  and  the  Word. 

Somewhat  allied  to  the  mystical  is  that  Pietistic  mode  of  exposi- 
tion, according  to  which  the  interpreter  claims  to  be  pietistic  inter- 
guided  by  an  "  inward  light,"  received  as  "  an  unction  pretation. 
from  the  Holy  One"  (1  John  ii,  20).  The  rules  of  grammar  and 
the  common  meaning  and  usage  of  words  are  discarded,  and  the 
internal  Light  of  the  Spirit  is  held  to  be  the  abiding  and  infallible 
Revealer.  Some  of  the  later  Pietists  of  Germany,  and  the  Quakers 
of  England  and  America  have  been  especially  given  to  this  mode 
of  handling  the  Scriptures.'     It  is  certainly  to  be  supposed  that 

'  From  Maurus.  Allejjoriae  in  Universam  Sacram  Scripturam,  as  given  in  Davidson, 
Hermeneutics,  pp.  105,  106. 

'  The  True  Christian  Religion,  chap,  iv,  6. 

^  From  pietistic  extravagant-e  we  of  course  except  such  men  as  Spener  and  A.  H. 
Francke,  the  great  leaders  of  what  is  known  as  Pietism  in  Germany.  The  noble  prac- 
tical character  of  their  work  and  teaching  saved  them  from  the  excesses  into  which 
most  of  those  run  who  are  commonly  called  Fictists.     "The  principal  efforts  of  the 


166  PRINCIPLES   OF 

this  holy  inward  light  Avould  never  contradict  itself,  or  guide  its 
followers  into  different  expositions  of  the  same  scripture.  But  the 
divergent  and  irreconcilable  interpretations  prevalent  among  the 
adhei-ents  of  this  system  show  that  the  "inward  light"  is  untrust- 
worthy. Like  the  allegorical  and  mystical  systems  of  interpreta- 
tion, Pietism  concedes  the  sanctity  of  the  Scriptures,  and  seeks  in 
them  the  lessons  of  eternal  life;  but  as  to  principles  and  rules  of 
exegesis  it  is  more  lawless  and  irrational.  The  Allegorist  pro- 
fesses to  follow  certain  analogies  and   correspondencies,  but   the 

^  Quaker-Pietist  is  a  law  unto  himself,  and  his  own  subjective  feel- 
in  »•  or  fancy  is  the  end  of  controversy.  He  sets  himself  up  as  a 
new  oracle,  and  while  assuming  to  follow  the  written  word  of  God, 
puts  forth  his  own  diction  as  a  further  revelation.  Such  a  pro- 
cedure, of  course,  can  never  commend  itself  to  the  common  sense 
and  the  rational  judgment. 

A  method  of  exposition,  which  owes  its  distinction  to  the  cele- 
brated J.  S.  Semler,  the  father  of  the  destructive  school  of  German 
AccoiTimoda-  Rationalism,  is  known  as  the  Accommodation  Theory. 
tion  Theory.  According  to  this  theory  the  Scripture  teachings  respect- 
ing miracles,  vicarious  and  expiatory  sacrifice,  the  resurrection, 
eternal  judgment,  and  the  existence  of  angels  and  demons,  are  to 
be  regarded  as  an  accommodation   to   the   superstitious   notions, 

>^  Ijrejudices,  and  ignorance  of  the  times.  The  supernatural  was 
thus  set  aside.  Semler  became  possessed  with  the  idea  that  we 
must  distinguish  between  religion  and  theology,  and  between 
personal  piety  and  the  public  teaching  of  the  Church.  He  re- 
jected the  doctrine  of  tlie  Divine  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures, 
and  argued  that,  as  the  Old  Testament  was  written  for  the  Jews, 
whose  religious  notions  were  narrow  and  faulty,  we  cannot  accept 
its  teachings  as  a  general  rule  of  faith.  Matthew's  Gospel,  he  held, 
was  intended  for  Jews  outside  of  Palestine,  and  John's  Gospel  for 
Christians  Avho  had  more  or  less  of  Grecian  culture.  Paul  at  first 
adapted  himself  to  Jewish  modes  of  thought  with  the  hope  of  win- 
ning over  many  of  his  coiintrymen  to  Christianity,  but  failing  in 
this,  he  turned  to  the  Gentiles,  and  became  pre-eminent  in  holding 
up  Christianity  as  the  religion  for  all  men.  The  different  books  of 
Scripture  were,  accordingly,  designed  to  serve  only  a  temporary 

Pietists,"  says  Iininoi',  "  were  directed  toward  the  cdificatory  ai)jdication  of  Scripture, 
as  may  be  seen  from  P'rancke's  Maiiuductio  ad  Leetionem  Scripturae  Sacrae.  This 
predominance  of  effort  at  edification  soon  degenerated  into  indifference  to  science,  and 
at  hist  iiitr,  jiroud  contempt  of  it.  Mystical  and  typolojjical  trifling  arose;  chiliastic 
phantasies  fountl  great  acceptance;  the  Scriptures  were  not  so  much  explained  as 
overwhelmed  with  pious  reflections."    Hermeneutics,  p.  40. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  167 

purpose,  and  many  of  their  statements  may  be  summarily  set  aside 
as  untrue. 

The  fatal  objection  to  this  method  of  interpretation  is  that  it 
necessarily  imj^ugns  the  veracity  and  honour  of  the  sacred  writers, 
and  of  the  Son  of  God  himself.  It  represents  them  as  conniving  at 
the  errors  and  ignorance  of  men,  and  confirming  them  and  the 
readers  of  the  Scriptures  in  such  ignorance  and  error.  If  such  a 
principle  be  admitted  into  our  expositions  of  the  Bible,  wc  at  once 
lose  our  moorings,  and  drift  out  upon  an  open  sea  of  conjecture 
and  uncertainty. 

A  passing  notice  should  also  be  taken  of  what  is  commonly  called 
the  Moral  Interpretation,  and  which  owes  its  origin  to  Moral interpre- 
the  celebrated  philosopher  of  Konigsberg,  Iramanuel  ^^^tion  of  Kaut. 
Kant.  The  prominence  given  to  the  pure  reason,  and  the  idealism 
maintained  in  his  metaphysical  system,  naturally  led  to  the  practice 
of  making  the  Scriptures  bend  to  the  preconceived  demands  of 
reason.  For,  although  the  whole  Scripture  be  given  by  inspiration 
of  God,  it  has  for  its  practical  value  and  purpose  the  moral  improve- 
ment of  man.  Hence,  if  the  literal  and  historical  sense  of  a  given 
passage  yield  no  profitable  moral  lesson,  such  as  commends  itself  to 
the  practical  reason,  we  are  at  liberty  to  set  it  aside,  and  attach  to 
the  words  such  a  meaning  as  is  compatible  with  the  religion  of 
reason.  It  is  maintained  that  such  expositions  are  not  to  be  charged 
with  insincerit}^,  inasmuch  as  they  are  not  to  be  set  forth  as  the 
meaning  strictly  intended  by  the  sacred  writers,  but  only  as  a 
meaning  which  the  writers  may  possibly  have  intended.'  The  only 
real  value  of  the  Scriptures  is  to  illustrate  and  confirm  the  religion 
of  reason. 

It  is  easy  to  see  that  such  a  system  of  interpretation,  which  pro- 
fessedly ignores  the  grammatical  and  historical  sense  of  the  Bible, 
can  have  no  reliable  or  self-consistent  rules.  Like  the  mystical  and 
allegorical  methods,  it  leaves  every  thing  subject  to  the  peculiar 
faith  or  fancy  of  the  interpreter. 

So  open  to  criticism  and  objection  are  all  the  above-mentioned 
methods  of  interpretation,  that  we  need  not  be  surprised  to  find 
them  offset  by  other  extremes.     Of  all  rationalistic  theories  the 

'  See  Kant,  Religion  innerhalb  der  Grenzen  der  blossen  Vermin  ft,  p.  IGl.  This 
"  was  the  Avorlv  of  his  old  age,  and  at  all  periods  of  his  life  he  seems  to  have  been  at 
least  as  deficient  in  religious  sentiment  as  in  emotional  imagination,  which  is  allied  to 
it.  .  .  .  It  treats  the  revelations  of  Scripture  in  regard  to  the  fall  of  man,  to  his  re- 
demption, and  to  his  restoration,  as  a  moral  allegory,  the  data  of  which  are  supplied 
by  the  consciousness  of  depravity,  and  of  dereliction  from  the  strict  principles  of  duty. 
It  is  Strauss  in  the  germ."     M'Clintock  and  Strong's  Cyclopaedia,  article  Kant. 


168  PRINCIPLES   OF 

Naturalistic  is  the  most  violent  and  radical.  A  rigid  application 
Naturaiistip  In-  ^^  tliis  theory  is  exhibited  in  Paulus'  Commentary  on 
terpretation.  the  New  Testament,'  in  which  it  is  maintained  that  the 
biblical  critic  should  always  distinguish  between  what  is  fact  and 
what  is  mere  oi)inion.  He  accepts  the  historical  truth  of  the  Gospel 
narratives,  but  holds  that  the  mode  of  accounting  for  them  is  a  mat- 
ter of  opinion.  He  rejects  all  supernatural  agency  in  human  affairs, 
and  explains  the  miracles  of  Jesus  either  as  acts  of  kindness,  or  ex- 
hibitions of  medical  skill,  or  illustrations  of  personal  sagacity  and 
tact,  recorded  in  a  manner  peculiar  to  the  age  and  opinions  of  the 
different  writers.  Jesus'  walking  on  the  sea  was  really  a  walking  on 
the  shore  ;  but  the  boat  was  all  the  time  so  near  the  shore,  that  when 
Peter  jumped  into  the  sea  Jesus  could  reach  and  rescue  him  from  the 
shore.  The  excitement  was  so  great,  and  the  impi-essiou  on  the  dis- 
ciples so  deep,  that  it  seemed  to  them  as  if  Jesus  had  miraculously 
walked  on  the  sea,  and  come  to  their  help.  The  apparent  miracle  of 
making  five  loaves  feed  five  thousand  people  was  done  simply  by  the 
example,  which  Jesus  bade  his  disci})k'S  set,  of  distributing  of  their 
own  little  store  to  those  immediately  about  them.  This  example  Avas 
promptly  followed  by  other  companies,  and  it  was  found  that  there 
was  more  than  suflicient  food  for  all.  Lazarus  did  not  really  die,  but 
fell  into  a  swoon,  and  was  supposed  to  be  dead.  But  Jesus  suspected 
the  real  state  of  the  case,  and  coming  to  the  tomb  at  the  opportune 
moment,  happily  found  that  his  suspicions  v/ere  correct;  and  his  Avis- 
dom  and  power  in  the  case  made  a  profound  and  lasting  impression. 

This  style  of  exposition,  however,  was  soon  seen  to  set  at  naught 
the  rational  laws  of  human  speech,  and  to  undermine  the  credibility 
of  all  ancient  history.  It  exposed  the  sacred  books  to  all  manner 
of  ridicule  and  satire,  and  only  for  a  little  time  awakened  any  con- 
siderable interest. 

The  Naturalistic  method  of  interpretation  was  followed  by  the 
The  Mytbicai  Mythical.  Its  most  distinguished  representative  was 
Theory.  David  Friedrich  Strauss,  whose  Life  of  Jesus  (Das  Lcben 

Jesu),  first  published  in  1835,  created  a  profound  sensation  in  the 
Christian  world.  The  Mythical  theory,  as  developed  and  rigidly 
carried  out  by  Strauss,  was  a  logical  and  self -consistent  application 
to  biblical  exposition  of  the  Ilegeliaji  (pantheistic)  doctrine  that  the 
idea  of  God  and  of  the  absolute  is  neither  shot  forth  miraculously, 
nor  revealed  in  the  individual,  but  developed  in  the  consciousness 
of  humanity.  According  to  Strauss,  the  Messianic  idea  was  gradu- 
ally developed  in  the   expectations  and  yearnings  of  the  Jewish 

'  riiilologiscli-ki'itischer  uud  historischor  Commentar  iibor  das  neuo  Teritament. 
4  vols.      1800-1804. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  169 

nation,  and  at  the  time  Jesus  appeared  it  was  rij^ening  into  full 
maturity.  The  Christ  was  to  spring  from  the  line  of  David,  be 
born  at  Bethlehem,  be  a  prophet  like  Moses,  and  speak  words  of 
infallible  wisdom.  His  age  should  be  full  of  signs  and  wonders. 
The  eyes  of  the  blind  should  be  opened,  the  ears  of  the  deaf  should 
be  unstopped,  and  the  tongue  of  the  dumb  should  sing.  Amid 
these  hopes  and  expectations  Jesus  arose,  an  Israelite  of  remarkaljle 
beauty  and  force  of  character,  who,  by  his  personal  excellence  and 
wise  discourse,  made  an  overwhelming  impression  upon  his  imme- 
diate friends  and  followers.  After  his  decease,  his  disciples  not 
only  yielded  to  the  conviction  that  he  must  have  risen  from  the 
dead,  but  began  at  once  to  associate  with  him  all  their  Messianic 
ideals.  Their  argument  was:  "Such  and  such  things  must  have 
pertained  to  the  Christ;  Jesus  was  the  Christ;  therefore  such  and 
such  things  happened  to  him." '  The  visit  of  the  wise  men  from 
the  East  was  suggested  by  Balaam's  prophecy  of  the  "  star  out  of 
Jacob"  (Num.  xxiv,  17).  The  flight  of  the  holy  family  into  Ejjypt 
was  worked  up  out  of  Moses'  flight  into  Midian;  and  the  slaughter 
of  the  infants  of  Bethlehem  out  of  Pharaoh's  order  to  destroy 
every  male  among  the  infant  Israelites  of  Egypt.  The  miraculous 
feeding  of  the  five  thousand  with  a  few  loaves  of  bread  was  appro- 
priated from  the  Old  Testament  story  of  the  manna.  The  trans- 
figuration in  the  high  mountain  apart  was  drawn  from  the  accounts 
of  Moses  and  Elijah  in  the  mount  of  God.  In  short,  Christ  did  not 
institute  the  Christian  Church,  and  send  forth  his  gospel,  as  nar- 
rated in  the  New  Testament ;  rather,  the  Christ  of  the  Gospels  was 
the  mythical  creation  of  the  early  Church.  Adoring  enthusiasts 
clothed  the  memory  of  the  man  Jesus  with  all  that  could  enhance 
his  name  and  character  as  the  Messiah  of  the  world.  But  what  is 
fact  and  what  is  fiction  must  be  determined  bj^  critical  analysis. 
Sometimes  it  may  be  impossible  to  draw  the  dividing  line. 

Among  the  criteria  by  which  we  are  to  distinguish  the  mythical, 
Strauss  instances  the  following:  A  narrative  is  not  his-  strauss'  crite- 
torical  (1)  when  its  statements  are  irreconcilable  with  na  of  myths. 
the  known  and  universal  laws  which  govern  the  course  of  events; 
(2)  when  it  is  inconsistent  with  itself  or  with  other  accounts  of  the 
same  thing;  (3)  when  the  actors  converse  in  poetry  or  elevated  dis- 
course unsuitable  to  their  training  and  situation;  (4)  when  the  es- 
sential substance  and  groundwork  of  a  reported  occurrence  is  either 
inconceivable  in  itself,  or  is  in  striking  harmony  with  some  Messi- 
anic idea  of  the  Jews  of  that  age.* 

'  See  Life  of  Jesus,  Introduction,  §  14. 
'  Ibid.,  Introduction,  §  16. 


170  PRINCIPLES    OF 

Xie  need  not  here  enter  npon  a  detailed  exposure  of  the  fallacies 
of  this  mythical  theory.  It  is  sufficient  to  observe,  on  the  four 
critical  rules  enumerated  above,  that  the  first  dogmatically  denies 
the  possibility  of  miracles;  the  second  (especially  as  used  by 
Strauss)  virtually  assume:^,  that  when  two  accounts  disagree,  both 
must  be  false!  the  third  is  worthless  until  it  is  clearly  shown 
what  is  suitable  or  unsuitable  in  each  given  case;  and  the  fourth, 
when  reduced  to  the  last  analysis,  Avill  be  found  to  be  simply  an 
appeal  to  one's  subjective  notions.  To  these  considerations  we  add 
that  the  Gospel  portraiture  of  Jesus  is  notably  unlike  the  prevalent 
Jewish  concejjtion  of  the  Messiah  at  that  time.  It  is  too  perfect 
and  marvellous  to  have  been  the  product  of  any  human  faiicy. 
Myths  arise  only  in  unhistoric  ages,  and  a  long  time  after  the  per- 
sons or  events  they  represent,  whereas  Jesus  lived  and  wrought  his 
wonderful  works  in  a  most  critical  period  of  Greek  and  Roman 
civilization.  Furthermore,  the  New  Testament  writings  were  pub- 
lished too  soon  after  the  actual  appearance  of  Jesus  to  embody 
such  a  mythical  development  as  Strauss  assumes.  While  attempt- 
ing to  show  how  the  Church  spontaneously  originated  the  Christ  of 
the  gospels,  this  whole  tlieory  fails  to  show  any  sufficient  cause  or 
explanation  of  the  origin  of  the  Church  and  of  Christianity  itself. 
The  mythical  interpretation,  after  half  a  century  of  learned  labours, 
has  notably  failed  to  commend  itself  to  the  judgment  of  Christian 
scholars,  and  has  few  advocates  at  the  jDresent  time. 

The  four  last-named  methods  of  interpretation  may  all  be  deslg- 
other rational-  "^'^ted  as  Rationalistic;  but  under  this  name  we  may 
istic  methods,  also  place  Some  other  methods  which  agree  Avith  the 
naturalistic,  the  mythical,  the  moral,  and  the  accommodation  the- 
ories, in  denying  the  supernatural  element  in  the  Bible.  The 
peculiar  methods  by  Avhich  F.  C.  Baur,  Renan,  Schenkel,  and  other 
rationalistic  critics  have  attempted  to  portray  the  life  of  Jesus, 
and  to  account  for  the  origin  of  the  Gospels,  the  Acts,  and  the 
Epistles,  often  involve  correspondingly  peculiar  principles  of  inter- 
pretation. All  these  writers,  however,  proceed  with  assumptions 
which  virtually  beg  the  questions  at  issue  between  the  naturalist 
and  the  supernaturalist.  But  they  all  conspicuously  differ  among 
themselves.  Baur  rejects  the  mythical  theory  of  Strauss,  and  finds 
the  origin  of  many  of  the  New  Testament  writings  in  the  Petrine 
and  Pauline  factions  of  the  early  Church,  These  factions  arose  over 
the  question  of  abolishing  the  Old  Testament  ceremonial  and  tlie 
rite  of  circumcision.  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  regarded  as  the 
monument  of  a  i)acification  between  these  rival  parties,  effected  in 
the  early  part  of  the  second  century.     The  book  is  treated  as  large- 


BIBLICAL   riERMENEUTICS.  171 

Ij  a  fiction,  in  which  the  author,  a  disciple  of  Paul,  represents 
Peter  as  the  first  to  preach  the  Gospel  to  the  Gentiles,  and  exhibits 
Paul  as  conforming  to  divers  Jewish  customs,  thus  securing  a  rec- 
onciliation between  the  Pauline  and  Petrine  Christians,'  Renan, 
on  the  other  hand,  maintains  a  legendary  theory  of  the  origin  of 
the  gospels,  and  attributes  the  miracles  of  Jesus,  like  the  marvels 
of  medifEval  saints,  j^artly  to  the  blind  adoration  and  enthusiasm  of 
his  followers,  and  partly  to  pious  fraud.  Schenkel  essays  to  make 
the  life  and  character  of  Christ  intelligible  by  stripping  it  of  the 
divine  and  the  miraculous,  and  presenting  him  as  a  mere  man. 

Against  all  these  rationalistic  theories  it  is  obvious  to  remark  that 
they  exclude  and  destroy  each  other.  Strauss  exploded  the  natur- 
alistic method  of  Paulus,  and  Baur  shows  that  tl^e  mythical  theory 
of  Strauss  is  untenable.  Renan  pronounces  against  the  theories  of 
Baur,  and  exposes  the  glaring  fallacy  of  making  the  Petrine  ar.d 
Pauline  factions  account  for  the  origin  of  the  New  Testament 
books,  and  the  books  account  for  the  factions.  Renan's  own  meth- 
ods of  criticism  appear  to  be  utterly  laAvless,  and  his  light  and  cap- 
tious remarks  have  led  many  of  his  readers  to  feel  that  he  is  desti- 
tute of  any  serious  or  sacred  convictions,  and  that  he  would  readily 
make  use  of  furtive  means  to  gain  his  end.  He  is  continually 
foisting  into  the  Scriptures  meanings  of  his  own,  and  making  the 
writers  say  what  was  probably  never  in  their  thoughts.  He  as- 
sumes, for  instance,  as  a  teaching  of  Jesus,  that  the  rich  man  was 
sent  to  Hades  because  he  was  rich,  and  Lazarus  was  glorified  be- 
cause he  was  a  pauper.  Many  of  his  interpretations  are  based  upon 
the  most  unwarrantable  assumptions,  and  are  unworthy  of  any  seri- 
ous attempt  at  refutation.  The  logical  issue  lies  far  back  of  his 
exegesis,  in  the  fundamental  questions  of  a  jaersonal  God  and  an 
OA'erruling  providence. 

Sceptical  and  rationalistic  assaults  upon  the  Scriptures  have  called 
out  a  method  of  interpretation  which  may  be  called  j^pojo„gtj(>  a,nd 
Apologetic.  It  assumes  to  defend  at  all  hazards  the  au-  Dogmatic  meth- 
thenticity,  genuineness,  and  credibility  of  every  docu- 
ment incorporated  in  the  sacred  canon,  and  its  standpoint  and 
methods  are  so  akin  to  that  of  the  Dogmatic  exposition  of  the  Bi- 
ble, that  we  present  the  two  together.  The  objectionable  feature 
of  these  methods  is  that  they  virtually  set  out  with  the  ostensible 
purpose  of  maintaining  a  preconceived  hypothesis.  Tlie  hypothesis 
may  be  right,  but  the  procedure  is  always  liable  to  mislead.      It 

'  Several  notions  of  the  Tiibingen  critical  school,  represented  by  Baur,  may  be  found 
in  substance  among  the  teachings  of  Semler,  tlie  author  of  this  destructive  species  of 
criticism.  , 


172  PRINCIPLES   OF 

presents  the  constant  temptation  to  find  desired  meanings  in  words, 
and  ignore  the  scope  and  general  purpose  of  the  writer.  There  are 
cases  where  it  is  well  to  assume  a  hypothesis,  and  use  it  as  a  means 
of  investigation;  but  in  all  such  cases  the  hypothesis  is  only  as- 
sumed tentatively,  not  affirmed  dogmatically.  In  the  exposition  of 
the  Bible,  apology  and  dogma  have  a  legitimate  place.  The  true 
apology  defends  the  sacred  books  against  an  unreasonable  and  cap- 
tious criticism,  and  presents  their  claims  to  be  regarded  as  the  reve- 
lation of  God.  But  this  can  be  done  only  by  pursuing  rational 
methods,  and  by  the  use  of  a  convincing  logic.  So  also  the  Scrip- 
tures are  profitable  for  dogma,  but  the  dogma  must  be  shown  to  be 
a  legitimate  teaching  of  the  Scripture,  not  a  traditional  idea  at- 
tached to  the  Scripture.  The  extermination  of  the  Canaanites,  the 
immolation  of  Jephthah's  daughter,  the  polygamy  of  the  Old  Test- 
ament saints,  and  their  complicity  Avith  slavery,  are  capable  of 
rational  explanation,  and,  in  that  sense,  of  a  valid  apology.  The 
true  apologist  will  not  attempt  to  justify  the  cruelties  of  the  an- 
cient wars,  or  hold  that  Israel  had  a  legal  right  to  Canaan;  he  will 
not  seek  to  evade  the  obvious  import  of  language,  and  maintain 
that  Jephthah's  daughter  was  not  offered  at  all,  but  became  a  Jew- 
ish nun;  nor  will  he  find  it  necessary  to  defend  the  Old  Testament 
practice  of  polygamy,  or  of  slavery.  He  Avill  let  facts  and  state- 
ments stand  in  their  own  light,  but  guard  against  false  inferences 
and  rash  conclusions.  So  also  the  doctrines  of  the  Trinity,  the 
divinity  of  Christ,  the  personality  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  vicarious 
atonement,  justification,  regeneration,  sanctification,  and  the  resur- 
rection, have  a  firm  foundation  in  the  Scriptures ;  but  how  unscien- 
tific and  objectionable  many  of  the  methods  by  which  these  and 
other  doctrines  have  been  maintained!  When  a  theologian  assumes 
the  standpoint  of  an  ecclesiastical  creed,  and  thence  proceeds,  Avith 
a  polemic  air,  to  search  for  single  texts  of  Scripture  favourable  to 
himself  or  unfavourable  to  his  opponent,  he  is  more  than  likely  to 
overdo  tlie  matter.  His  creed  may  be  as  true  as  the  Bible  itself; 
but  his  method  is  reprehensible.  Witness  the  disputes  of  Luther 
and  Zwingle  over  the  matter  of  consubstantiation.  Read  the 
l)olemic  literature  of  the  Antinomian,  the  Calvinistic,  and  the  Sacra- 
mentarian  controversies.  The  whole  Bible  is  ransacked  and  treated 
as  if  it  were  an  atomical  collection  of  dogmatic  proof-texts.  How 
hard  is  it,  even  at  this  day,  for  the  polemic  divine  to  concede  the 
spuriousness  of  1  John  v,  7.  It  should  be  remembered  that  no 
apology  is  sound,  and  no  doctrine  sure,  which  rests  upon  uncritical 
methods,  or  proceeds  U])on  dogmatical  assumptions.  Such  proce- 
dures are  not  exposition,  but  imposition. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  173 

In  distinction  from  all  the  above-mentioned  methods  of  interpre- 
tation, we  may  name  the  Grammatico-Historical  as  the   ^ 

'  _      •'  .  ^  Grammatico- 

method  which  most  fully  commends  itself  to  the  judg-  Historical  id- 
ment  and  conscience  of  Christian  scholars.  Its  funda-  ^^p^'^'^'^'^io^- 
mental  principle  is  to  gather  from  the  Scriptures  themselves  tho 
precise  meaning  which  the  writers  intended  to  convey.  It  applies 
to  the  sacred  books  the  same  princij^les,  the  same  grammatical  proc- 
ess and  exercise  of  common  sense  and  reason,  which  we  apply  to 
other  books.  The  grammatico-historical  exegete,  furnished  with 
suitable  qualifications,  intellectual,  educational,  and  moral,'  will  ac- 
cept the  claims  of  the  Bible  without  prejudice  or  adverse  prepos- 
session, and,  with  no  ambition  to  prove  them  true  or  false,  will 
investigate  the  language  and  import  of  each  book  with  fearless  in- 
dependence. He  will  master  the  language  of  the  writer,  the  jjar- 
ticular  dialect  which  he  used,  and  his  peculiar  style  and  manner  of 
expression.  He  will  inquire  into  the  circumstances  under  which  he 
wrote,  the  manners  and  customs  of  his  age,  and  the  purpose  or  ob- 
ject which  he  had  in  view.  He  has  a  right  to  assume  that  no  sensi- 
ble author  will  be  knowingly  inconsistent  with  himself,  or  seek  to 
bewilder  and  mislead  his  readers, 

"Nearly  all  the  treatises  on  hermeneutics,"  says  Moses  Stuart, 

"since  the  days  of  Ernesti,  have  laid  it  down  as  a  max-  ^  ^., ,  ^  ^ 
,  .  .  The  Bible  to  be 

im  which  cannot  be  controverted,  that  the  Bible  is  to  interpreted  like 
be  interpreted  in  the  same  manner,  that  is,  by  the  same  ^^^'^^  books. 
principles,  as  all  other  books.  Writers  are  not  wanting,  previously 
to  the  period  in  which  Ernesti  lived,  who  have  maintained  the  same 
thing;  but  we  may  also  find  some  who  have  assailed  the  position  be- 
fore us,  and  laboured  to  show  that  it  is  nothing  less  than  a  species 
of  profaneness  to  treat  the  sa(!red  books  as  we  do  the  classic  au- 
thors v/ith  respect  to  their  interpretation.  Is  this  allegation  well 
grounded  ?  Is  there  any  good  reason  to  object  to  the  principle  of 
interpretation  now  in  question  ?  In  order  to  answer,  let  us  direct 
our  attention  to  the  nature  and  source  of  what  are  now  called  prin- 
ciples or  laws  of  iater^^retation :  Whence  did  they  originate  ?  Are 
they  the  artificial  production  of  high-wrought  skill,  of  laboured  re- 
search, of  profound  and  extensive  learning  ?  Did  they  spring  from 
the  subtleties  of  nice  distinctions,  from  the  philosophical  and  meta- 
physical efforts  of  the  schools  ?  Are  they  the  product  of  exalted 
and  dazzling  genius,  sparks  of  celestial  fire,  which  none  but  a 
favoured  few  can  emit?  No;  nothing  of  all  this.  The  principles 
of  interpretation,  as  to  their  substantial  and  essential  elements,  are 
no  invention  of  man,  no  product  of  his  effort  and  learned  skill; 

^Compare  pp.  151-158  on  the  Qualifications  of  an  Interpreter. 


174  PRIXCIPLE3   OF 

nay,  tLey  can  scarcely  be  said  -with  trnth  to  have  "been  discovered 
by  him.  They  are  coeval  with  our  nature.  Ever  since  man  waa 
created  and  endowed  with  the  powers  of  speech,  and  made  a  cnrti- 
municative,  social  being,  lie  has  had  occasion  to  practice  upon  the 
principles  of  interpretation,  and  has  actually  done  so.  From  the 
first  moment  that  one  human  being  addressed  another  by  the  use 
of  language  down  to  the  present  hour,  the  essential  laws  of  inter- 
pretation became,  and  have  continued  to  l)e,  a  practical  matter. 
'Die  person  addressed  has  always  been  an  interpreter  in  every  in- 
stance where  he  has  heard  and  understood  what  was  addressed  to 
him.  All  the  human  race,  therefore,  are,  and  ever  have  been,  in- 
terpreters. It  is  a  law  of  their  rational,  intelligent,  communicative 
nature.  Just  as  truly  as  one  human  being  was  formed  so  as  to  ad- 
dress another  in  language,  just  so  truly  that  other  was  formed  to 
interpret  and  understand  what  is  said. 

"  I  venture  to  advance  a  step  farther  and  to  aver  that  all  men 
are,  and  ever  have  been,  in  reality,  good  and  iruc  interpreters  of 
each  other's  language.  Has  any  part  of  our  race,  in  full  j)Ossession 
of  the  human  faculties,  ever  failed  to  understand  what  others  said 
to  them,  and  to  understand  it  truly?  or  to  make  themselves  under- 
stood by  others,  Avhen  they  have  in  their  communications  kept 
within  the  circle  of  their  own  knowledge?  Surely  none.  Inter- 
pretation, then,  in  its  basis  or  fundamental  princijjles,  is  a  native 
art,  if  I  may  so  speak.  It  is  coeval  with  the  power  of  uttering 
words.  It  is,  of  course,  a  universal  art;  it  is  common  to  all  nations, 
barbarous  as  well  as  civilized.  One  cannot  commit  a  more  palpable 
error  in  relation  to  this  subject  than  to  suppose  that  the  art  of  in- 
terpretation is  ...  in  itself  wholly  dependent  on  acquired  skill  for 
the  discovery  and  development  of  its  prmciples.  Acquired  skill  has 
indeed  helped  to  an  orderly  exhibition  and  arrangement  of  its  prin- 
ciples; but  this  is  all.  The  materials  were  all  in  existence  before 
skill  attempted  to  develop  them.  .  .  .  An  interpreter,  well  skilled 
in  his  art,  will  glory  in  it,  that  it  is  an  art  which  has  its  foundation 
in  the  laws  of  our  intellectual  and  rational  nature,  and  is  coe\al  and 
connate  with  this  nature."  ' 

(So  far,  indeed,  as  the  Bible  maj'^  differ  from  other  books  in  its  su- 
pernatural revelations,  its  symbols  and  peculiar  claims,  it  may  recjuire 
some  corresponding  principles  of  exposition;  but  none,  we  believe, 
which  require  us  to  turn  aside  from  the  propositions  here  affirmed. 

'"Are  the  same  principles  of  interpretation  to  he  applied  to  tlie  Scrii)turcs  as  to 
other  boolis ?  "  Article  by  I'ldf.  M.  Sluarl  in  llu'  American  Biblical  Repository  for 
Jan.,  1832,  pp.  124-126.  Sec  also  Ilahn,  On  the  Grannnatico-Historical  Interpretation 
of  the  Scriptnres,  in  the  same  Repository  for  Jan.,  1S31. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  175 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE   PRIMARY   MEANING  OF  WORDS. 

In"  a  previous  chapter  of  this  work'  Ave  showed  how  new  languages 
originate;  how  they  become  modified  and  changed  ;  how  new  dia- 
lects arise,  and  how,  at  length,  a  national  form  of  speech  may  go 
out  of  use  and  become  known  as  a  dead  language.     Attention  to 

these  facts  makes  it  apparent  that  any  griven  lan<ruas-e  ^ 

.  -^  ^  •'   '^  »      &      Words  practical- 

is  an  accumulation  and  aggregate  of  words  which  a  ly  the  elements 

nation  or  community  of  people  use  for  the  interchange  °^  '^'^suage. 
and  expression  of  their  thoughts.  "Language,"  says  Whitney, 
"has,  in  fact,  no  existence  save  in  the  minds  and  mouths  of  those 
Avho  use  it ;  it  is  made  up  of  separate  articulated  signs  of  thought, 
each  of  which  is  attached  by  a  mental  association  to  the  idea  it 
represents,  is  uttered  by  voluntary  effort,  and  has  its  value  and 
currency  only  b}^  the  agreement  of  speakers  and  hearers."^ 

To  understand,  therefore,  the  language  of  a  speaker  or  writer,  it 
is  necessary,  first  of  all,  to  know  the  meaning  of  his  words.  The 
interpreter,  especially,  needs  to  keep  in  mind  the  difference,  so  fre- 
quently apparent,  between  the  primitive  signification  of  a  word 
and  that  which  it  subsequently  obtains.  We  first  naturally  inquire 
after  the  original  meaning  of  a  word,  or  what  is  com-   ^^ 

^  °  .  Etymology,  itstts 

monly  called  its   etymology.     Next  we  examme  the   loqucmu,     and 
iisus  loqiiendi,  or'  actual  meaning  which  it  bears  in  com-  sy'i^''^y'"«s. 
mon  usage;  and  then  we  are  prepared  to  understand  the  occasion 
and  import  of  synonymes,  and  how  a  language  becomes  enriched 
by  them. 

Whatever  may  be  the  common  meaning  of  a  word,  as  used  by  a 
particular  people  or  age,  it  often  represents  a  history.  Manirow  value 
Language  has  been  significantly  characterized  as  fossil  of  etymology. 
poetry,  fossil  history,  fossil  ethics,  fossil  philosophy.  "This  means," 
says  Trench,  "that  just  as  in  some  fossil,  curious  and  beautiful 
shapes  of  vegetable  or  animal  life,  the  graceful  fern,  or  the  finely 
vertebrated  lizard,  extinct,  it  may  be,  for  thousands  of  years,  are 
permanently  bound  up  with  the  stone,  and  rescued  from  that  per- 
ishing which  Avould  have  otherAvise  been  theirs,  so  in  Avords  are 

'  Part  I,  chap,  iii,  pp.  72,  73. 

'  Language  and  the  Study  of  Language,  p.  35. 


170  PRINCIPLES   OF 

beautiful  thoughts  and  images,  the  imagination  and  feeling  of  past 
ages,  of  men  whose  very  names  have  perished,  preserved  and  made 
safe  forever.'"  Benjamin  W.  Dwight  declares  etymology  to  be 
"fossil  poetry,  philosophy,  and  history  combined.  In  the  treasured 
words  of  the  past,  the  very  spirits  of  elder  days  look  out  upon  us, 
as  from  so  many  crystalline  spheres,  with  friendly  recognition.  We 
see  in  them  the  liglit  of  their  cj^es ;  we  feel  in  them  the  warmth  of 
their  hearts.  They  are  relics,  they  are  tokens,  and  almost  break 
into  life  again  at  our  touch.  The  etymologist  unites  in  himself  the 
characteristics  of  the  traveller,  roaming  through  strange  and  far- 
off  climes;  the  philosopher,  jurying  into  the  causes  and  sequences 
of  things ;  the  antiquary,  filling  his  cabinet  with  ancient  curiosities 
and  wonders;  the  historiographer,  gathering  up  the  records  of  by- 
gone men  and  ages;  and  the  artist,  studying  the  beautiful  designs 
in  word  architecture  furnished  him  by  various  nations." 

Take,  for  example,  that  frequently  occurring  New  Testament 
,„  ^  ,  word  ei,'K?^7]aia,  commonly  rendered  church.  Compounded 
of  SK,  out  of,  and  KaXeiv,  to  call,  or  summon,  it  was  nrst 
u;vjd  of  an  assembly  of  the  citizens  of  a  Greek  community,  sum- 
moned together  by  a  crier,  for  the  transaction  of  business  pertain- 
ing to  the  public  welfare.  The  preposition  ek  indicates  that  it  was 
no  motley  crowd,^  no  mass-meeting  of  nondescripts,  but  a  select 
company  gathei'ed  out  from  the  common  mass;  it  Avas  an  assembly 
of  free  citizens,  possessed  of  well-understood  legal  rights  and 
powers.  The  verb  KaXelv  denotes  that  the  assembly  was  legally 
called  (compare  the  kv  r^  evvoixcp  eKicX-qaia  of  Acts  xix,  39),  sum- 
moned for  the  purpose  of  deliberating  in  lawful  conclave.  Whether 
the  etymological  connexion  between  the  Hebrew  h^Jl  and  the  Greek 
icaXeTv  be  vital  or  merely  accidental,  the  Septuagint  translators  gen- 
erally render  7ni?  by  hcicXrjaia,  and  thus  by  an  obvious  process,  tTC- 
K/irjala  came  to  represent  among  the  Hellenists  the  Old  Testament 
conception  of  "  the  congregation  of  the  people  of  Israel,"  as  usually 
denoted  by  the  Hebrew  word  ^n|5.  Hence  it  was  natural  for  Ste- 
phen to  speak  of  the  congregation  of  Israel,  which  Moses  led  out  of 
Egypt,  as  "  the  eKtcXTjota  in  the  wilderness"  (Acts  vii,  38),  and  equal- 
ly natural  for  the  word  to  become  the  common  designation  of  the 
Christian  community  of  converts  from  Judaism  and  the  world. 
Into  this  New  Testament  sense  of  the  word,  it  was  also  important 
that  the  full  force  of  ^«  and  KaXeiv  [aXijai^,  KXrjrog)  should  continue. 

'Tlic  Study  of  Words.     Introductory  Lecture,  p.  12.     New  York,  1801. 
'  Article  on  The  Science  of  Etymology,  in  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  April,  1858,  p.  438. 
'  Compare  the  coiifused  assembly^  tj  iKK\i]aia  avvKexv/itvT},  composed  of  the  multitude, 
6  ox^og,  in  Acts  xix,  32,  33,  40. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  177 

As  the  old  Greek  assembly  was  called  by  a  public  herald  {Ki]pv^),  so 
"the  Church  of  God  (or  of  the  Lord),  Avliich  he  purchased  with  his 
own  blood"  (Acts  xx,  28),  is  tlie  congregation  of  those  who  are 
"called  to  be  saints"  {K.XrjTol  ay  lot,  Rom.  i,  7),  "called  out  of  dark- 
ness into  his  marvellous  light"  (1  Pet.  ii,  9),  called  "unto  his  king- 
dom and  glory"  (1  Thess.  ii,  12),  and  called  by  the  voice  of  an  au- 
thorized herald  or  preacher  (Rom.  x,  14,  15;  1  Tim.  ii,  7).^  With 
this  fundamental  idea  the  church  may  denote  either  the  small  as- 
sembly in  a  private  house  (Rom.  xvi,  5  ;  Philemon  2),  the  Christian 
congregations  of  particular  towns  and  cities  (1  Cor.  i,  2 ;  1  Thess. 
i,  1),  or  the  Church  universal  (Eph.  i,  22;  iii,  21).  But  a  new  idea  is 
added  when  our  Lord  says,  "  I  will  build  my  Church  "  (Matt,  xvi,  18). 
Here  the  company  of  the  saints  {kXtjtoI  ayioi)  is  conceived  of  as  a 
house,  a  stately  edifice ;  and  it  was  peculiai-ly  fitting  that  Peter,  the 
disciple  to  whom  these  words  were  addressed,  should  afterward 
write  to  the  general  Church,  and  designate  it  not  only  as  "a  chosen 
generation,  a  royal  priesthood,  a  holy  nation,"  but  also  as  "  a  spir- 
itual house,"  builded  of  living  stones  (1  Pet.  ii,  5,  9).  Paul  also 
uses  the  same  grand  image,  and  speaks  of  the  household  of  God  as 
"having  been  built  upon  the  foundation  of  the  apostles  and  prophets, 
Jesus  Christ  himself  being  the  chief  corner  stone,  in  wliora  all  the 
building,  fitly  framed  together,  grows  unto  a  living  temple  in  the 
Lord"  (Eph.  ii,  20,  21).  And  then  again,  to  this  image  of  a  build- 
ing (comp.  1  Cor.  iii,  9)  he  also  adds  that  of  a  living  liuman  body 
of  which  Christ  is  the  head,  defining  the  Avhole  as  "his  bod}",  the 
fulness  (7rA?/pW|wa)  of  him  who  fills  all  things  in  all"  (Eph.  i,  23). 
Comp.  also  Rom.  xii,  5;  1  Cor.  xii,  12-28;  and  Col.  i,  18. 

Observe  also  the  forms  and  derivatives  of  the  Hebrew  "i;3,  to 
cover.  The  primary  meaning  is  to  cover  over,  so  as  to  ^j^^^  ^^^  ^^^^_ 
hide  from  view.  The  ark  was  thus  covered  or  over-  eri?ig  of  atone- 
laid  with  a  covering  of  some  material  like  pitch  (Gen.  m^^i^t. 
vi,  14).  Then  it  came  to  be  used  of  a  flower  or  shrub,  with  the 
resin  or  powder  of  which  oriental  females  are  said  to  have  covered 
and  stained  their  finger  nails  (Cant,  i,  14).  Again  w^e  find  it  ap- 
plied to  villages  or  liamlets  (1  Sam.  vi,  18;  1  Chron.  xxvii,  25),  ap- 
parently, as  Gesenius  suggests,  because  such  places  were  regarded 
as  a  covering  or  shelter  to  the  inhabitants.  The  verb  is  also  used 
of  the  abolishing  or  setting  aside  of  a  covenant  (Isa.  xxviii,  18). 
But  the  deeper  meaning  of  the  word  is  that  of  covering,  or  hiding 
sin,  and  thus  making  an  atonement.  Thus  Jacob  thought  to  cover 
his  brother  Esau  with  a. present  (Gen.  xxxii,  20).  His  words  are, 
literally,  "  I  will  cover  his  face  with  the  present  which  goes  before 

'  A  similar  interesting  history  attaches  to  the  words  Kf/pv^  and  Kjjpvaau. 
12 


178  PRINCIPLES   OP 

me,  and  afterward  I  will  see  bis  face ;  perhaps  he  will  lift  up  my 
face."  Feeling  that  he  had  sorely  wronged  his  brother,  he  would 
now  fain  cover  his  face  with  such  a  princely  gift  that  Esau  would 
no  more  behold  those  wrongs  of  the  past.  His  old  offences  being 
thus  hidden,  he  hopes  to  be  permitted  to  see  his  brother's  face  in 
peace ;  and  perhaps  even  Esau  will  condescend  to  lift  up  his  face — 
raise  from  the  dust  the  face  of  the  prostrate  and  penitent  Jacob. 
The  transition  was  easy  from  this  use  of  the  verb  to  that  of  making 
an  atonement,  a  meaning  vrhich  it  constantly  conveys  in  the  books 
of  the  law  (Lev.  xvii,  11).  And  hence  the  use  of  the  noun  ipi)  in 
the  sense  of  ransom,  satisfaction  (Exod.  xxx,  12),  and  the  plural 
D^'iM,  atonements  (Exod.  xxx,  10;  Lev.  xxiii,  27,  28).  Hence, 
also,  that  word  of  profound  significance,  0^33,  capporeth,  the 
mercy-seat,  the  lid  or  cover  of  the  ark  which  contained  the  tables 
of  the  law  (Exod.  xxv,  17-22) — the  symbol  of  mercy  covering 
wrath. 

Additional  interest  is  given  to  the  study  of  words  by  the  science 
of  comparative  philology.     In  tracing  a  word  through 
parativephiioi-  a  whole  family  of  languages,  we  note  not  only  the  va- 
°^'  riety  of  forms   it  may  have  taken,  but  the  different 

usage  and  shades  of  meaning  it  acquired  among  different  peoples. 
The  Hebrew  words  3X,  father,  and  }?,  son,  are  traceable  through 
all  the  Semitic  tongues,  and  maintain  their  common  signification  in 
all.  The  Greek  word  for  heart,  KagSia,  appears  also  in  the  Sanskrit 
hrid,  Latin  cor,  Italian  cuore,  Spanish  corasow,  Portuguese,  cora^am, 
French  cmur,  and  English  core.  Some  words,  especially  verbs,  ac- 
quire new  meanings  as  they  pass  from  one  language  to  another. 
Hence  the  meaning  Avhich  a  word  bears  in  Arabic  or  Syriac  may  not 
be  the  meaning  it  was  designed  to  convey  in  Hebrew.  Tims  the 
Hebrew  word  "V^V  is  frequently  used  in  the  Old  Testament  in  the  sense 
to  stand,  to  be  firm,  to  stand  ifj);  and  this  general  idea  can  be  traced 
in  the  corresponding  word  and  its  derivatives  in  the  Arabic,  Etlii- 
opie  (to  ereet  a  column,  to  establish),  Chaldee  (to  rise  ttp),  Samari- 
tan and  Talnuidic;  but  in  the  Syriac  it  is  the  word  commonly  used 
for  baj>t>sn>.  Some  say  this  was  because  the  candidate  stood  wliilc 
he  was  baj)tized;  others,  that  the  idea  associated  with  baptism  was 
that  of  confirming  or  est((blishing  in  the  faith;  while  others  believe 
tliat  the  Syriac  word  is  to  be  traced  to  a  different  root.  Whatever 
be  the  true  explanation,  it  is  easy  to  see  that  the  same  word  may 
have  different  meanings  in  cognate  languages,  and,  therefore,  a  sig- 
nification which  appears  in  Arabic  or  Syriac  may  be  very  remote 
from  that  which  the  word  holds  in  the  Hebrew.  Hence  great  cau- 
tion is  necessary  in  tracing  etymologies. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  179 

It  is  well  known  that,  in  all  languages,  the  origin  of  many 
words  has  become  utterly  lost.  The  wonder,  indeed,  Rare  words 
is  that  we  are  able  to  trace  the  etymology  of  such  a  tmda-af  ae/- 
large  proportion.  The  extensive  literature  of  the  Greek  °f^^^"- 
language  enables  the  New  Testament  interpi-eter  to  ascertain 
without  much  difficulty  the  roots  and  usage  of  most  of  the  words 
with  which  he  has  to  deal.  But  the  Old  Testament  ScrijDtures  em- 
body substantially  all  the  remains  of  the  Hebrew  language,  and  when 
we  meet  with  a  word  which  occurs  but  once  in  the  entire  literature 
extant,  we  may  often  be  puzzled  to  know  the  exact  meaning  vfhich 
it  was  intended  to  convey.  In  such  cases  help  from  cognate 
tongues  is  particularly  important.  The  word  D^D,  in  Gen.  xxviii, 
12,  occurs  nowhere  else  in  Hebrew.  The  root  appears  to  be  hh^,  to 
cast  up,  to  raise;  and  from  the  same  root  comes  the  word  n^DO,  used 
of  public  highxoays  (Judg.  xx,  32;  Isa.  xl,  3;  Ixii,  10),  the  ^;ai'/is  of 
locusts  (Joel  ii,  8),  the  courses  of  the  stars  (Jndg.  v,  20),  and  ter- 
races or  stainoays  to  the  temple  (2  Chron.  ix,  11).  The  Arabic 
word  sxillum  confirms  the  sense  of  stairioay  or  ladder,  and  leaves  no 
reasonable  doubt  as  to  the  meaning  of  sidkun  in  Gen.  xxviii,  12. 
Jacob  saw,  in  his  dream,  an  elevated  ladder  or  stairway  reaching 
from  the  earth  to  the  heavens.  In  determining  the  sense  of  such 
arca^  Aeyofieva,  or  words  occurring  but  once,  we  have  to  be  guided 
by  the  context,  by  analogy  of  kindred  roots,  if  any  appear  in  the 
language,  by  ancient  versions  of  the  word  in  other  languages,  and 
by  whatever  traces  of  the  word  may  be  found  in  cognate  tongues. 

One  of  the  most  noted  of  New  Testament  dira^  key6[.ieva  is  the 
word  eiTiovocov  in  the  Lord's  prayer,  Matt,  vi,  1 1 ;  Luke  ,„ 
XI,  3.  it  occurs  nowhere  else  m  Greek  literature.  1  wo 
derivations  have  been  urged,  one  from  etti  and  levac,  or  the  partici- 
ple of  Ineifu,  to  yo  toward  or  apjyroach  /  according  to  Avhich  the 
meaning  would  be,  "give  us  our  coming  bread,"  that  is,  bread  for 
the  coming  day;  to-morrow's  bread.  This  is  etymologically  possi- 
ble, and,  on  the  ground  of  analogy,  has  much  in  its  favour.  But 
this  meaning  does  not  accord  with  oijfieQov,  this  day,  occurring  in 
the  same  verse,  nor  with  our  Lord's  teaching  in  verse  34  of  the 
same  chapter.  The  other  derivation  is  from  e-rrt  and  ovaia,  exig- 
ence, sidmsfence  (from  slfxi,  to  be),  and  means  that  which  is  necessary 
for  existence,  "  our  essential  bread."  This  latter  seems  bv  far  the 
more  appropriate  meaning. 

Another  difficult  word  is  TTiuriicog,  used  only  in  Mark  xiv,  3,  and 
John  xii,  3,  to  describe  the  nard  (vaqSog)  with  which 
Mary  anointed  the  feet  of  Jesus.     It  is  found  in  raanu-  "^'  '^°^' 

scripts  of  several  Greek  authors  (Plato,  Gorgias,  455  a.;  Aristotle, 


ISO  PRINCIPLES   OF 

Rhct.  i,  2)  apparently  as  a  false  reading  for  TreiariKog,  persuasive ; 
but  this  signitication  would  have  no  relevancy  to  nard.  Scaliger 
proposed  the  meaning  potoided  nard,  deriving  TnartKog  from  Trriaau), 
to  pow)d,  a  possible  derivation,  but  unsupported  by  any  thing  anal- 
ogous. Some  think  the  word  may  be  a  proper  adjective  denoting 
the  place  from  which  the  nard  came;  i.  e.,  Pistic  nard.  The  Vul- 
gate of  John  xii,  3,  has  nardi  pistici.  This  use  of  the  word,  how- 
ever, is  altogether  uncertain.  The  Vulgate  of  Mark  xiv,  3,  has 
spicati,  as  denoting  the  spikes  or  ears  of  the  nard  plant;  hence  the 
\xovA  spikenard.  But  there  is  no  good  giound  for  accepting  this 
interpretation.  Many  derive  the  word  from  -rrlvio  (or  m-iaKO)),  to 
drink,  and  understand  drinkable  or  liquid  nard,  and  urge  that  sev- 
eral ancient  writers  affirm  that  certain  anointing  oils  were  used  for 
drinking.  If  such  were  the  meaning  here,  however,  the  word 
should  refer  to  the  ointment  {jivgov),  not  the  nard.  The  explana- 
tion best  suited  to  the  context,  and  not  without  warrant  in  Greek 
usage,  makes  the  Avord  equivalent  to  -morog,  faithfid,  trusticorthy; 
applied  to  a  material  object  it  would  naturally  signify  genuine, 
pure,  that  on  which  one  can  rely. 

In  determining  the  meaning  of  compound  words  we  may  usually 
resort  to  the  lexical  and  grammatical  analogy  of  Ian-  compound 
guages.  The  signification  of  a  compound  expression  is  ^o^"^^. 
generally  apparent  from  the  import  of  the  different  terms  of  which 
it  is  compounded.  Thus,  the  word  elqrjvonoioi,  used  in  Matt,  v,  0, 
is  at  once  seen  to  be  composed  o?  elp/]vr],  j^eace,  and  noiio),  to  make, 
and  signifies  those  icho  make  (work  or  establish)  peace.  The  mean- 
ing, says  Meyer,  is  "not  the  peaceful  {eIqtjvikoI,  James  iii,  17; 
2  Mace.  V,  25;  or  elpTjvevovTeg,  Sirach  vi,  7),  a  meaning  which  does 
not  appear  even  in  Pollux,  i,  41,  152  (Augustine  thinks  of  the  moi-al 
inner  harmony;  De  Wette,  of  the  inclination  of  the  contemporaries 
of  Jesus  to  war  and  tumult;  Bleek  reminds  us  of  Jewish  party 
hatred);  but  the  founders  of  ])eace  (Xen.  Hist.  Gr.,  vi,  3,  4;  Phit. 
Mor.,  p.  279  B.;  comp.  Col.  i,  20;  Prov.  x,  10),  Avho  as  such  min- 
ister to  God's  good  pleasui-e,  who  is  the  God  of  peace  (Rom.  xvi, 
20;  2  Cor,  xiii,  11),  as  Christ  himself  was  the  highest  founder  of 
peace  (Luke  ii,  14;  John  xvi,  33;  Eph.  ii,  14)."'  Simihirly  we 
judge  of  tlie  meaning  of  kdeXo&Qr]f>Keia  in  Col.  ii,  23,  coinpounded 
of  k-&eX(t>  and  dprjaKFia,  and  signifying  will  worship,  self-chosen  wor- 
ship; TToXvoTTAayxvoc,  very  compassionate  (James  v,  11);  owav^dv- 
oiiat,  to  grow  together  with  (Matt,  xiii,  30);  rponocpoQeo,  to  bear  as 
a.  nourisher  (Acts  xiii,  18),  and  many  other  compounds,  which,  like 
the  above,  occur  but  once  in  the  New  Testament. 

'  Critical  and  Exegetical  Hand-book  to  the  Gospel  of  Matthew,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL   HERME^EUTICS.  181 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE    USUS    LOQUENDI. 

Some  "words  have  a  variety  of  significations,  and  hence,  whatever 
their  primitive  meaning,  we  are  obliged  to  gather  from  the  context, 
and  from  familiarity  with  the  usage  of  the  language,  the  particular 
sense  which  they  bear  in  a  given  passage  of  Scripture.  Many  a 
word  in  common  use  has  lost  its    original   meaning.    „ 

°  ^      The  meaning  of 

How  few  of  those  who  daily  use  the  word  sincere  are  words  becomes 
aware  that  it  was  originally  applied  to  pure  honey,  from  ^^^•^^^'^• 
which  all  wax  was  purged.  Composed  of  the  Latin  words  sine, 
without,  and  cera,  wax,  it  appears  to  have  been  first  used  of  honev 
strained  or  separated  from  the  wax-like  comb.  The  word  cunninr/ 
no  longer  means  knowledge,  or  honourable  skill,  but  is  generally 
used  in  a  bad  sense,  as  implying  artful  trickery.  The  verb  let  has 
come  to  mean  the  very  opposite  of  what  it  once  did,  namely  to 
hinder;  and  prevent,  which  was  formerly  used  in  the  sense  of  going 
before,  so  as  to  prepare  the  way  or  assist  one,  now  means  to  inter- 
cept or  obstruct.  Hence  the  importance  of  attending  to  what  is 
commonly  called  the  t(S2is  loqiiendi,  or  current  usage  of  Avords  as 
employed  by  a  particular  writer,  or  prevalent  in  a  j^articular  age. 
It  often  hajjpens,  also,  that  a  writer  uses  a  common  word  in  some 
special  and  peculiar  sense,  and  then  his  own  definitions  must  be 
taken,  or  the  context  and  scope  must  be  consulted,  in  order  to  de- 
termine the  precise  meaning  intended. 

There  are  many  ways  by  which  the  usiis  loquendi  of  a  writer 
may  be  ascertained.     The  first  and  simplest  is  when  he   ^  ., 

•'  ^  Writer     often 

himself  defines  the  terms  he  uses.  Thus  the  word  defines  his  own 
aciTioq,  perfect,  complete,  occurring  only  in  2  Tim.  iii,  17,  *"™^- 
is  defined  by  what  immediately  follows:  "That  the  man  of  God 
may  be  perfect,  thoroughly  furnished  unto  every  good  work." 
That  is,  he  is  made  perfect  or  complete  in  this,  that  he  is  thorough- 
ly furnished  and  fitted,  by  the  varied  uses  of  the  insj^ired  Scripture, 
to  go  forward  unto  the  accomplishment  of  every  good  work.  We 
also  find  the  word  reXeioi,  commonly  rendered  perfect,  defined  in 
Heb.  V,  14,  as  those  "who  by  practice  have  the  senses  trained  unto  a 
discrimination  of  good  and  of  evil."  They  are,  accordingly,  the  ma- 
ture and  experienced  Christians  as  distinguished  from  babes,  vri-ioi. 


182  PRINCIPLES   OF 

Compare  verse  13,  and  1  Cor.  ii,  6.  So  also,  in  Rom.  ii,  28,  29,  the 
apo.stle  defines  the  genuine  Jew  and  genuine  circumcision  as  fol- 
lows: "For  he  is  not  a  Jew,  who  is  one  outwardly  (ev  rw  (bavepu)); 
nor  is  that  circumcision,  which  is  outward  in  the  liesh :  but  he  is  a 
Jew,  who  is  one  inwardly  (ev  roi  KpvTrraj) ;  and  cii'cumcision  is  that 
of  the  heart,  in  the  spirit,  not  in  the  letter;  whose  praise  is  not  of 
men,  hut  of  God." 

But  the  immediate  context,  no  less  than  the  writer's  own  defini- 
immediate  tions,  generally  serves  to  exhibit  any  peculiar  usage  of 
context.  words.  Thus,  TTVEVfia,  icind,  sjyirit,  is  used  in  the  New 
Testament  to  denote  the  wind  (John  iii,  8),  the  vital  breath  (Rev. 
xi,  11),  the  natural  disposition  or  temper  of  mind  (Luke  ix,  55;  Gal. 
vi,  1),  the  life  principle  or  immortal  nature  of  man  (John  vi,  63), 
the  perfected  spirit  of  a  saint  in  the  heavenly  life  (Heb.  xii,  23), 
the  unclean  spirits  of  demons  (Matt,  x,  1  ;  Luke  iv,  36),  and  the 
Holy  Spirit  of  God  (John  iv,  24;  Matt,  xxviii,  19;  Rom.  viii,  9-11). 
It  needs  but  a  simi^le  attention  to  the  context,  in  any  of  these  pas- 
sages, to  determine  the  particular  sense  in  which  the  woi-d  is  used. 
In  John  iii,  8,  we  note  the  two  different  meanings  of  nvev^a  in  one 
and  the  same  verse.  "The  wind  (to  irvevfia)  blows  where  it  will, 
and  the  sound  of  it  thou  hearest ;  but  thou  knowest  not  wlience  it 
comes  and  whitlier  it  goes;  so  is  every  one  who  is  born  of  the 
Spirit"  [he  rov  nvevfiarog) .  Bengel  holds,  indeed,  that  we  should 
here  render  TTvevjxa  in  both  instances  by  spirit,  and  he  urges  that 
the  divine  Spirit,  and  not  the  wind,  has  a  icill  and  a  voice.^  But 
the  groat  body  of  interpreters  maintain  the  common  version.  Nic- 
odemus  was  curious  and  perplexed  to  know  the  hoio  (ttw^-,  verses  4 
and  9)  of  the  Holy  Spirit's  workings,  and  as  the  Almighty  of  old 
spoke  to  Job  out  of  the  whirlwind,  and  appealed  to  the  manifold 
mysteries  of  nature  in  vindication  of  his  ways,  so  here  the  Son  of 
God  appeals  to  the  mystery  in  the  motion  of  the  wind.  "  Wouldst 
till)  11  know  the  whence  and  whither  of  tlie  Spirit,  and  yet  thou 
knowest  not  the  origin  and  the  end  of  the  common  wind?  Where- 
fore dost  thou  not  marvel  concerning  the  air  which  breathes  around 
thee,  and  of  which  thou  livest?" "  "  Our  Lord,"  says  Alford,  "might 
liave  chosen  any  of  the  mysteries  of  nature  to  ilhistrate  the  ])oint. 
lie  takes  that  one  which  is  above  others  symbolic  of  the  action 
of  the  Spirit,  and  which  in  both  languages,  that  in  which  lie 
spoke,  as  well  as  that  in  which  his  speech  is  reported,  is  expressed 
by  the  same  word.  So  that  the  words  as  they  stand  apply  them- 
selves at  once  to  the  Spirit  and  his  working,  witliout  any  figure."' 

'  Gnomon  of  the  Now  Testament,  in  loco. 

*  Coiiip.  Slier,  Words  of  tlie  Lord  .To^us,  in  loi'o.  *  Greek  Testament,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  183 

The  ■svord  oroix^^ov,  used  in  classical  Greek  for  the  upright  post 
of  a  sundial,  then  for  an  elementary  sound  in  language  (from  let- 
tei's  standing  in  roAVs),  came  to  be  used  almost  solely  in  tlie  plural, 
TO,  GTOix^la,  in  the  sense  of  elements  or  rudinie7its.  In  2  Pet.  iii,  10 
it  evidently  denotes  the  elements  of  nature,  the  component  parts 
of  the  physical  universe ;  but  in  Gal.  iv,  3,  9,  as  the  immediate  con- 
text shows,  it  denotes  the  ceremonials  of  Judaism,  considered  as 
elementary  object  lessons,  adapted  to  the  capacity  of  children. 
In  this  sense  the  word  may  also  denote  the  ceremonial  elements  in 
the  religious  cultus  of  the  heathen  world  (compare  verse  8).^ 
The  enlightened  Christian  should  grow  out  of  these,  and  pass  be- 
yond them,  for  otherwise  they  trammel,  and  become  a  s3"stem  of 
bondage.  Compare  also  the  use  of  the  word  in  Col.  ii,  8,  20  and 
Heb.  V,  12. 

In  connexion  with  the  immediate  context,  the  nature  of  the  sub- 
ject may  also  determine  the  usage  of  a  Avord.  Thus,  in  Mature  of  the 
2  Cor.  V,  1,  2,  the  reference  of  the  words  oiKia,  house,  subject. 
OKTjvog,  tabernacle,  oIko6o^i],  buildiur/,  and  ohrj-j'jQiov,  habitation,  to 
the  body  as  a  covering  of  the  soul  hardl}^  admits  of  question.  The 
whole  passage  (verses  1-4)  reads  literally  thus :  "  For  we  know  that 
if  our  house  of  the  tabernacle  upon  earth  were  dissolved, 

.2  Cor  V,  1-4. 

a  building  from  God  we  have,  a  house  not  made  with 
hands,  eternal,  in  the  heavens.  For  also  in  this  we  groan,  yearning 
to  be  clothed  upon  with  our  habitation  which  is  from  heaven,  since 
indeed  also  (eb/e  Kat)  being  clothed  we  shall  not  be  found  naked. 
For,  indeed,  we  who  are  in  the  tabernacle  groan,  being  burdened, 
in  that  Ave  Avould  not  be  unclothed,  but  clothed  upon,  to  the  end 
that  that  AA-hich  is  mortal  may  be  SAA^allowed  up  by  the  life."  Hodge 
holds  that  the  "building  from  God"  is  heaven  itself,  and  argues 
that  in  John  xiv,  2,  heaven  is  compared  to  a  house  of  many  man- 
sions;  in  Luke  xvi,  9,  to  a  habitation  ;  and  in  Heb.  xi,  10,  and  Rev. 
xxi,  10,  to  a  city  of  dAA^ellings.'  But  the  scripture  in  question  is  too 
explicit,  and  the  nature  of  the  subject  too  limited,  to  alloAV  other 
scriptures,  like  those  cited,  to  determine  its  meaning.  No  one 
doubts  that  the  phrase,  "our  house  of  the  tabernacle  upon  earth," 
refers  to  the  human  body,  Avhich  is  liable  to  dissolution.  It  is  com- 
pared to  a  tent,  or  tabernacle  (ofcrivog),  and  also  to  a  vesture,  thus 
presenting  us  with  a  double  metaphor.  "The  word  tent,"  says 
Stanley,  "lent  itself  to  this  imagery,  from  being  used  in  later  Greek 
writers  for  the  human  body,  especially  in  medical  Avriters,  Avho 
seem  to  have  been  led  to  adopt  the  word  from  the  skin-maierisds 

'  Corap.  Lightfoot's  Commentary  on  Galatians  iv,  11. 
^  Commentary  on  Second  Corinthians,  in  loco. 


184  PRINCIPLES    OF 

of  which  tents  were  eomposGcl.  The  explanation  of  this  abrupt 
transition  from  the  figure  of  a  house  or  tent  to  that  of  a  garment, 
may  be  found  in  the  image,  familiar  to  the  apostle,  both  from  his 
occupations  and  his  birthplace,  of  the  tent  of  Cilician  hairclotli, 
which  might  almost  equally  suggest  the  idea  of  a  habitation  and  of 
a  vesture.  Compare  the  same  union  of  metaphors  in  Psa.  civ,  2, 
'  "Who  coverest  thyself  with  light  as  with  a  garment ;  who  stretch- 
est  out  the  heavens  like  a  curtain'  (of  a  tent)."^ 

The  main  subject,  then,  is  the  present  body  considered  as  an 
earthly  house,  a  tabernacle  upon  earth.  In  it  we  groan;  in  it  we 
are  under  burden;  in  it  we  endure  "the  momentary  lightness  of  our 
afHiction  "  {rd  napavrUa  eXatppbv  rrjq  ■dUxpeo)g),  which  is  mentioned 
in  chapter  iv,  17,  and  which  is  there  set  in  contrast  with  an  "eter- 
nal weight  of  glory"  {alu}viov  fidpog  Sd^rjg).  To  this  earthly  house, 
heaven  itself,  whether  considered  as  the  house  of  many  mansions 
(John  xiv,  2)  or  the  city  of  God  (Rev.  xxi,  10),  affords  no  true 
antithesis.  The  true  antithesis  is  the  heavenly  body,  the  vesture 
of  immortality,  which  is  from  God.  For  the  opposite  of  our  house 
is  the  building  fro)ii  God ;  the  one  may  be  dissolved,  the  other  is 
eternal ;  the  one  is  iqjon  earth  [eTrlyeiog),  the  other  is  (not  heaven 
itself,  but)  in  the  heavens.  The  true  parallel  to  the  entire  passage 
before  us  is  1  Cor.  xv,  47-54,  where  the  earthly  and  the  heavenly 
bodies  are  contrasted,  and  it  is  said  (ver.  53)  "  this  corruptible 
must  be  clothed  with  incorruption,  and  this  mortal  must  be  clothed 
with  immortality." 

The  above  example  also  illustrates  how  antithesis,  contrast,  or 
Contrast  or  op-  Opposition,  may  serve  to  determine  the  meaning  of 
position.  words.     A  further  instance  may  be  cited  from  Rom. 

viii,  5-8.  In  verse  4  the  apostle  has  introduced  the  antithetic  ex- 
pressions Kara  odpKa,  and  Kara  Tzvevfia,  according  to  the  flesh  and 
according  to  the  spirit.  He  then  proceeds  to  define,  as  by  contrast, 
the  two  characters.  "  For  they  who  are  according  to  the  flesh  the 
things  of  the  flesh  do  mind  {(j)Qovovatv,  think  of,  care  for),  but  they, 
according  to  the  spirit,  the  things  of  the  spirit.  For  the  mind  of 
the  flesh  is  death,  but  the  mind  of  the  spirit  life  and  peace.  Be- 
cause the  mind  of  the  flesh  is  enmity  toward  God,  for  to  the  law  of 
God  it  does  not  submit  itself,  for  it  is  not  able;  and  they  who  are 
in  the  flesh  are  not  able  to  please  God."  The  spirit,  throughout 
this  passage,  is  to  be  understood  of  the  Holy  Spirit:  "the  Spirit 
of  life  in  Christ  Jesus,"  mentioned  in  verse  2,  which  delivers  the 
sinner  "from  tlie  law  of  sin  and  of  death."  The  being  according 
to  the  flesh,  and  the  being  iji  the  flesh,  are  to  be  understood  of 
'  Commentary  on  St.  Paul's  Epistles  to  the  Coriiithiiuis,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  185 

iinrecrenerate  and  unsanctified  human  life,  conditioned  and  controlled 
by  carnal  principles  and  motives.  This  Scripture,  and  more  that 
might  be  cited,  indicates,  by  detailed  opposition  and  contrast,  the 
essential  and  eternal  antagonism  between  sinful  carnality  and  re- 
deemed spirituality  in  human  life  and  character. 

The  tisus  loquendi  of  many  words  may  be  seen  in  the  parallelisms 
of  Hebrew  j^oetry.     Whether  the  parallelism  be  synon-   Hebrew  parai 
ymous  or  antithetic,'   it   may  serve    to   exhibit  in  an   leiisms. 
unmistakable  way   the    general   import    of    the   terms   emjiloyed. 
Take,   for  example,   the  following   passage   from   the   eighteenth 
Psalm,  verses  6-15  (Heb.  7-16): 

6  In  my  distress  I  call  Jehovah, 
And  to  my  God  I  cry ; 

He  liears  from  his  sanctuary  my  voice, 
And  my  cry  before  him  comes  into  his  ears. 

7  Then  shakes  and  quakes  the  land, 

And  the  foundations  of  the  mountains  tremble, 
And  they  shake  themselves,  for  he  was  angry. 

8  Tl:erc  went  up  a  smoke  in  his  nostril, 
And  fire  from  his  mouth  devours; 
Hot  coals  glowed  from  him. 

9  And  he  bows  the  heavens  and  comes  down, 
And  a  dense  gloom  under  his  feet; 

10  And  he  rides  upon  a  cherub,  and  flies, 
And  soars  upon  the  wings  of  the  wind. 

11  lie  sets  darkness  his  covei-ing, 
His  pavilion  round  about  him, 

A  darkness  of  waters,  thick  clouds  of  the  skies. 

12  From  the  brightness  Iiefore  him  his  thick  clouds  passed  away, 
Hail,  and  hot  coals  of  fire. 

13  Then  Jehovah  thunders  in  the  heavens, 
And  the  Most  Hiyl)  gives  forth  his  voice, 
Hail,  and  hot  coals  of  fire. 

14  And  he  sends  forth  Ids  arrows  and  scatters  them, 
And  lightnings  he  shot,  and  puts  tliem  in  commotion. 

15  And  the  beds  of  tlie  waters  are  seen. 

And  the  foundations  of  the  worhl  are  uncovered, 

From  thy  rebuke,  O  Jehovah! 

From  the  breath  of  tlie  wind  of  thy  nostril. 

It  requires  but  little  attention  here  to  observe  how  such  words  as 
call,  cry,  he  hears  my  voice,  and  "tny  cry  comes  into  his  ears  (verse  6), 
mutually  explain  and  illustrate  one  another.  The  same  may  be 
said  of  the  words  shakes,  quakes,  tremble,  and  shake  themselves,  in 

'  On  Hebrew  Parallelisms,  see  pp.  95-98. 


186  PRINCIPLES   OF 

verse  7;  smolce,  fire^  and  coals  in  verse  8;  rides,  fl^^s,  and  soars  in 
verse  10;  arrous  and  U<jhtni)igs,  scatters  and  puts  in  commotion,  in 
verse  14;  and  so  to  some  extent  of  the  varied  expressions  of  nearly 
every  versa. 

Here,  too,  may  be  seen  how  suhject  and  predicate  serve  to  ex- 
„  ^.   ,        ,.     plain  one  another.     Thus,  in  verse  8,  above,  snwue  goes 

Subject,  predi-    -i  _  '  '       . 

cate,  and  ad-  lip,  fire  devours,  hot  coals  glotc.  So  in  Matt,  v,  13: 
juncts.  u-£  ^j^g  g^l^  beeome  tasteless,"  the  sense  of  the  verb 

fiiOQavdrj,  become  tasteless,  is  determined  by  the  subject  dXag,  salt. 
But  in  Rom.  i,  22,  the  import  of  this  same  verb  is  to  become  fool- 
ish, as  the  whole  sentence  shows:  "Professing  to  be  wise,  they 
become  foolish,"  i.  e.,  made  fools  of  themselves.  The  word  is 
used  in  a  similar  signification  in  1  Cor.  i,  20:  "Did  not  God  make 
foolish  the  wisdom  of  the  world?  "  The  extent  to  which  qualify- 
ing words,  as  adjectives  and  adverbs,  serve  to  limit  or  define  the 
meaning  is  too  apparent  to  call  for  special  illustration. 

A  further  and  most  important  method,  of  ascertaining  the  usus 
,  loquendi  is  an  extensive  and  careful  comparison  of  sim- 

Conipanson  of    _    -^  ... 

pai-aiiei  pas-  ilar  or  parallel  passages  of  Scripture.  When  a  writer 
sages.  j^^g  treated  a  given  subject  in  different  parts   of  his 

writings,  or  when  different  writers  have  treated  the  same  subject,  it 
is  both  justice  to  the  writers,  and  important  in  interpretation,  to 
collate  and  compare  all  that  is  written.  The  obscure  or  doubtful 
passages  are  to  be  explained  by  what  is  plain  and  simple.  A  sub- 
ject may  be  only  incidentally  noticed  in  one  place,  but  be  treated 
with  extensive  fulness  in  another.  Thus,  in  Kom.  xiii,  12,  we  have 
the  exhortation,  "Let  us  put  on  the  armour  of  light,"  set  forth 
merely  in  contrast  with  "cast  off  the  works  of  darkness;"  but  if 
we  inquire  into  the  meaning  of  this  "armour  of  light,"  how  much 
more  fully  and  forcibly  does  it  impress  us  when  we  compare  the 
detailed  description  given  in  Ephesians  vi,  13-17:  "Take  up  the 
whole  armour  of  God.  .  .  .  Stand,  therefore,  having  girded  your 
loins  with  truth,  and  having  put  on  the  breastplate  of  righteous- 
ness, and  having  shod  your  feet  with  the  preparation  of  the  gospel 
of  peace;  withal  taking  up  the  shield  of  faith  wherewith  ye  shall 
be  able  to  quench  all  the  fiery  darts  of  the  evil  one.  And  take  the 
helmet  of  salvation,  and  the  sword  of  the  Spirit,  which  is  the  word 
of  God."     Compare  also  1  Thess.  v,  8. 

The  meaning  of  the  word  ti'^JX  (compare  the  Greek  voaog)  in  Jer. 
xvii,  9,  must  be  determined  by  ascertaining  its  use  in  other  pas- 
sages. The  common  version  translates  it  "  desperately  Avicked," 
but  usage  does  not  sustain  this  meaning.  The  j)rimary  sense  of 
the  word  apj^ears  to  be  incurably  sick,  or  diseased.     It  is  used  in 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEU TICS.  187 

2  Sam,  xii,  15,  to  describe  the  condition  of  David's  child  v/hcn 
smitten  of  the  Lord  so  that  it  became  very  sick  (t^^J^"').  It  is  used 
in  reference  to  the  lamentable  idolatry  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel 
(Micah  i,  9),  where  the  common  version  renders,  "  Her  wound  is  m- 
curahle,''''  and  gives  in  the  margin,  "  She  is  grievously  sick  of  her 
wounds."  The  same  signification  a^^pears  also  in  Job  xxxiv,  6: 
"  My  wound  ("'ifn,  wound  caused  by  an  arrow)  is  incurable."  In 
Isa>  xvii,  11,  we  have  the  thought  of  "  incurable  jiain,"  and  in  Jer. 
XV,  18,  we  read,  "  Wherefore  has  my  pain  been  enduring,  and  my 
stroke  incurable?"  Compare  also  Jer.  xxx,  12,  15.  In  Jer.  xvii, 
16,  the  prophet  uses  this  word  to  characterize  the  day  of  grievous 
calamity  as  a  day  of  mortal  sickness  (K'lJwX  DV).  In  the  ninth  verse, 
therefore,  of  the  same  chapter,  where  the  deceitful  heart  is  charac- 
terized by  this  word,  which  everywhere  else  maintains  its  original 
sense  of  a  diseased  and  incurable  condition,  we  should  also  adhere 
to  the  main  idea  made  manifest  by  all  these  parallels:  "Deceitful 
is  the  heart  above  everything;  and  incurably  diseased  is  it;  mIio 
knows  it  ?  ' 

The  xisus  loqiiendi  of  common  words  is,  of  course,  to  be  as- 
certained by  the  manner  and  the  connection  in  which  General  and 
they  are  generally  used.  We  feel  at  once  the  incon-  familiar  usage, 
gruity  of  saying,  "  Adriansz  or  Lippersheim  discovered  the  tele- 
scope, and  Harvey  invented  the  circulation  of  the  blood."  We 
know  from  familiar  usage  that  discover  applies  to  tlie  finding  out 
or  uncovering  of  that  which  was  in  existence  before,  but  was  hid- 
den from  our  view  or  knowledge,  while  the  word  invent  is  applica- 
ble to  the  contriving  and  constructing  of  something  which  had  no 
actual  existence  before.  Thus,  the  astronomer  invents  a  telescoj^e, 
and  by  its  aid  discovers  the  motions  of  the  stars.  The  passage  in 
1  Cor.  xiv,  34,  S5,  has  been  wrested  to  mean  something  else  than 
the  prohibition  of  women's  speaking  in  the  public  assemblies  of 
churches.  Some  have  assumed  that  the  words  churches  and  church 
in  these  verses  are  to  be  understood  of  the  business  meetings  of  the 
Christians,  in  which  it  was  not  proper  for  the  v/omen  to  take  part. 
But  the  entire  context  shows  that  the  apostle  has  espe(!ially  in 
mind  the  worshipping  assembly.  Others  have  sought  in  the  word 
XaXelv  a  peculiar  sense,  and,  finding  that  it  bears  in  classic  Greei; 
writers  the  meaning  of  babble,  prattle,  they  have  strangely  taugbt 
that  Paul  means  to  say:  "Let  your  women  keep  silence  in  the 
churches;  for  it  is  not  permitted  them  to  babble.  .  .  .  For  it  is  a 
shame  for  a  woman  to  babble  in  church!"  A  sliorht  examination 
shows  that  in  this  same  chapter  the  word  XaX€iv,  to  sjicak,  occui's 

'  On  the  importance  of  comparing  parallel  passages,  see  further  in  Chapter  vlii. 


188  PRINCIPLES   OP 

more  than  twenty  times,  and  in  no  instance  is  there  any  necessity 
or  reason  to  understand  it  in  other  tlian  its  ordinary  sense  of  dis- 
eoursing,  ftpeakiur/.  Who,  for  instance,  would  accuse  Paul  of  say- 
ing, "  I  thank  God,  1  babble  with  tongues  more  than  ye  all "  (verse 
18);  or  "let  two  or  three  of  -the  prophets  babble,  and  the  others 
judge"  (verse  29)?  Hence  appears  the  necessity,  in  interpreta- 
tion, of  observing  the  general  usage  rather  than  the  etymology  of 

words. 

In  ascertaining  the  meaning  of  rare  words,  d~a^  Xeyo^eiu,  or 
Ancient  ver-  Avords  wliich  occur  but  once,  and  words  of  doubtful 
sions.  import,  the  ancient  versions  of  Scripture  furnish  an  im- 

portant aid.  For,  as  Davidson  well  observes,  "An  interpreter 
cannot  arrive  at  the  right  meaning  of  every  part  of  the  Bible  by 
the  Bible  itself.  Many  portions  are  dark  and  ambiguous.  Even 
in  discovering  the  correct  sense,  no  less  than  in  defending  the 
truth,  other  means  are  needed.  Numerous  passages  will  be  abso- 
lutely unintelligible  without  such  helps  as  lie  out  of  the  Scriptures. 
The  usages  of  the  Hebrew  and  Hebrew-Greek  languages  cannot  be 
fully  known  by  their  existing  remains.' 

In  the  elucidation  of  difficult  words  and  phrases  the  Septuagint 
translation  of  the  Old  Testament  holds  the  first  rank  among  the 
ancient  versions.     It   antedates   all  existing  Hebrew  manuscripts; 
and  parts  of  it,  especially  the  Pentateuch,  belong,  without  much 
doubt,  to  the  third  century  before  the  Christian  era.     Philo  and 
Josephus  appear  to  have  made  more  use  of  it  than  they  did  of  the 
Hebrew  original;  the  Ilellonistic  Jews  used  it  in  their  synagogues, 
and  the  New  Testament  writers  frequently  quote  from  it.     Being 
made  by  Jewish  scholars,  it  serves  to  show  how  before  the  time 
of  Christ  the  Jews  interi)reted  their  Scriptures.     Next  in  imj)ort- 
ance  to  the  Septuagint  is  the  Vulgate,  or  Latin  Version,  largely 
prepared  in  its  present  form  by  St.  Jerome,  who  derived  much 
knowledge  and  assistance  from  the  Jew  s  of  his  time.     After  these 
we  place  the  Peshito-Syriac  Version,  the  Targums,  or  Chaldee  Par- 
aphrases of  the  Old  Testament,  especiall}'  that  of  Onkelos  on  the 
Pentateuch,  and  Jonathan  Bi-n  Uzziel  on  the  Prophets,   and  the 
Greek  versions  of  Aquila,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion.^     The  other 
ancient  versions,  such  as  the  Arabic,  Coptic,  yEthiopic,  Armenian, 
and  Gothic,  are  of  less  value,  and,  in  determining  the  meaniiig  of 
rare  words,  cannot  be  relied  on  as  having  any  considerable  weight 
or  authority. 

'  Hermencutics,  pajje  616. 

'  On  the  histoiv  and  character  of  all  these  ancient  versions,  see  Hannan's,  Keil's, 
or  IJleck's  "  Introduction ; "  also  the  various  biblical  dictionaries  and  cyclop;edias. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  189 

A  study  and  comparison  of  these  ancient  versions  will  show  that 
they  often  differ  very  widely.  In  many  instances  it  is 
easy  to  see,  in  the  light  of  modern  researches,  that  the  sions  often  dif- 
old  translators  fell  into  grave  errors,  and  were  often  at  ^^' 
a  loss  to  determine  the  meaning  of  rare  and  doubtful  w^ords.  When 
the  context,  parallel  passages,  and  several  of  the  versions  agree  in 
giving  the  same  signification  to  a  word,  that  signification  may  gen- 
erally be  relied  upon  as  the  true  one.  But  when  the  w^ord  is  an 
cTTaf  Xeyofievov,  and  the  passage  has  no  parallel,  and  the  versions 
vary,  great  caution  is  necessary  lest  we  allow  too  much  authority 
to  one  or  more  versions,  wdiich,  after  all,  may  have  been  only  con- 
jectural. 

The  following  examples  will  illustrate  the  use,  and  the  interest 
attaching  to  the  study,  of  the  ancient  versions.  In  the  Authorized 
English  Version  of  Gen.  i,  2,  the  w^ords  irinj  ^rin  are  translated, 
vnthout  form  and  void.  The  Targum  of  Onkelos  has  N"'Jp"'"il  t;nv, 
loaste  and  empty;  the  Vulgate:  inanis  et  vacua,  empty  and  void ; 
Aquila:  Kevojf^ia  koI  ovSev,  e7nptlness  and  nothing.  Thus,  all  these 
versions  substantially  agree,  and  the  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  words 
is  now  allowed  to  be  desolation  and  emj^tiiiess.  The  Syriac  merely 
repeats  the  Hebrew  words,  but  the  Septuagint  reads  aoQarot;  nal 
dKaraGKevafTTog,  invisible  and  -unformed,  and  cannot  be  allow^ed  to 
set  aside  the  meaning  presented  in  all  the  other  versions. 

In  Gen.  xlix,  6,  the  Septuagint  gives  the  more  correct  translation 
of  "li'^  ^"lipj^,  they  houghed  an  ox,  evevpoKonrjaav  ravgov;  but  the  Clial- 
dee,  Syriac,  Vulgate,  Aquila,  and  Symmachus  read,  like  the  Au- 
thorized Version,  they  digged  doion  a  vxdl.  Here,  however,  the  au- 
thority of  versions  is  outweighed  by  the  fact  that,  in  all  other 
passages  where  the  Piel  of  this  word  occurs,  it  means  to  hamstring 
or  hough  an  animal.  Compare  Josh,  xi,  6,  9;  2  Sam.  viii,  4;  1  Chron. 
xviii,  4.  Where  the  usus  loquendi  can  thus  be  determined  from  the 
language  itself,  it  has  more  weight  than  the  testimony  of  many 
versions. 

The  versions  also  differ  in  the  rendering  of  n35fy  in  Psa.  xvi,  4. 
This  word  elsewhere  (Job  ix,  28;  Psa.  cxlvii,  3;  Prov.  x,  10;' xv,  13) 
alwavs  means  sorrow  :  but  the  form  yiV  means  idols,  and  the  Chal- 

•  ^  T    T  ' 

dee,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion  so  render  ri^Sfy  in  Psa.  xvi,  4 :  they 
mnltiplg  their  idols,  or  many  are  their  idols.  But  the  Septuagint, 
Vulgate,  Syriac,  Arabic,  Ethiopic,  and  Aquila,  render  the  word  sor- 
rotes,  and  this  meaning  is  best  sustained  by  the  usage  of  the  lan- 
guage. 

In  Cant,  ii,  12,  "I'Pjn  ^V.  is  rendered  by  the  Septuagint  Katpog  TTjg 
roixTjg,  time  of  the  cutting ;  Symmachus,  time  of  the  pruning  {nXa- 


100  PRINCIPLES    OF 

devaeug) ;  so  also  the  Yulgate,  te7npus  putalionis.  Most  modern  in- 
terpreters, however,  discard  these  ancient  versions  here,  and  under- 
stand the  words  to  mean,  t/ie  time  of  song  is  come/  not  merely  or  pnr- 
ticularly  the  suKjinr/  of  hinh,  as  the  English  version,  but  all  the 
glad  songs  of  springtime,  in  which  shepherds  and  husbandmen  alike 
rejoice.  In  this  interpretation  they  are  governed  by  the  considera- 
tion that  T'OT  and  nil'DT  signify  song  and  songs  in  2  Sam.  xxiii,  1; 
Job  XXXV,  10;  Psa.  xcv,  2;  cxix,  54;  Isa.  xxiv,  16;  xxv,  5,  and  that 
when  "the  blossoms  have  been  seen  in  the  land"  the  pruning  time 
is  altogether  past. 

In  Isa.  Hi,  13  all  the  ancient  versions  except  the  Chaldee  render  the 
word  h'y~T  in  the  sense  of  acting  loisely.  This  fact  gives  great  weight 
to  tliat  interpretation  of  the  word,  and  it  ought  not  to  be  set  aside 
by  the  testmiony  of  one  version,  and  by  the  opinion,  Avhich  is  open 
to  question,  that  i^'Sy'*  is  in  some  passages  equivalent  to  n7Vn,  to 
2)rosper. 

From  the  above  examples  it  may  be  seen  Avhat  judgment  and 
caution  arc  necessary  in  the  use  of  the  ancient  versions  of  the  Bible. 
In  fact,  no  specific  rules  can  safely  be  laid  down  to  govern  us  in 
the  use  of  them.  Sometimes  the  etymology  of  a  word,  or  the  con- 
text, or  a  parallel  passage  may  have  more  weight  than  all  the  ver- 
sions combined;  while  in  other  instances  the  reverse  may  be  true. 
Where  the  versions  are  conflicting,  the  context  and  the  analogy  of 
the  language  must  generally  be  allowed  to  take  the  precedence. 

In  ascertaining  the  meaning  of  many  Greek  words  the  ancient 
Glossaries  and  glossaries  of  Hesychius,  Suidas,  Photius,  and  others  are 
schoiia.  useful ;  but  as  they  treat  very  few  of  the  obscure  words 

of  the  New  Testament,  they  are  of  comparatively  little  value  to 
the  biblical  interpreter.  Scholia,  or  brief  critical  notes  on  portions 
of  the  New  Testament,  extracted  chiefly  from  the  writings  of  the 
Greek  Fathers,  such  as  Origen  and  Chrysostom,  occasionally  serve 
a  good  purpose,'  but  they  have  been  superseded  by  the  moj'e  thor- 
ough and  scholarly  researches  of  modern  times,  and  the  results  of 
this  research  are  en^bodied  in  the  leading  critical  commentaries  and 
biblical  lexicons  of  the  present  day.  Tlie  Rabbinical  commentaries 
of  Aben-Ezra,  Jarchi,  Kimchi,  and  Tanchum  are  ofien  found  ser- 
viceable in  the  exposition  of  the  Old  Testament. 

'  The  commentaries  of  Theodoret  and  Thcophylact  are  largely  composed  of  extracts 
from  Chrysostom.  To  the  same  class  belong  the  commentaries  of  Eiithymius,  Zigii- 
benus,  U']cumenius,  Andreas,  and  Arcthas.  The  Catenae  of  the  (Jreek  Fathers  by 
Procopius,  Olympiodorus,  and  Nicephonis  treat  several  books  of  the  Old  Testament. 
The  celelM-atcd  (.'atena  Aiirca  of  Thomas  Aquinas  covers  the  Four  Gospels,  and  was 
translated  and  published  at  Oxford  iu  1845  bv  J.  II.  Newman. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS,  191 


CHAPTER  V. 

SYNONYMES. 

Words,  being  the  conventional  signs  and  representatives  of  ideas, 
are  changeable  in  both  form  and  meaning  by  reason  of  the  changes 
constantly  taking  place  in  human  society.  In  pi'ocess  of  time  the 
same  word  will  be  applied  to  a  variety  of  uses,  and  come  to  have  a 
variety  of  meanings.  Thus,  the  name  board,  another 
form  of  the  word  broad,  was  originally  applied  to  a  piece  have  many 
of  timber,  hewed  or  sawed  so  as  to  form  a  wide,  thin  "•^'''"i"?'*- 
plank.  It  was  also  applied  to  a  table  on  w^hich  food  was  placed, 
and  it  became  common  to  speak  of  gathering  around  the  festive 
board.  Thence  it  came  by  a  natural  process  to  be  applied  to  the 
food  which  was  placed  upon  the  table,  and  men  were  said  to  work 
or  pay  for  their  board.  By  a  similar  association  the  word  was  also 
applied  to  a  body  of  men  who  were  wont  to  gather  around  a  table 
to  transact  business,  and  hence  Ave  have  board  of  trustees,  board 
of  commissioners.  The  word  is  also  used  for  the  deck  of  a  ^  essel ; 
hence  the  terms  on  board,  overboard,  and  some  other  less  common 
nautical  expressions.  Thus  it  often  hapf)ens,  that  the  original 
meaning  of  a  word  falls  into  disuse,  and  is  forgotten,  while 
*  later  meanings  become  current,  and  find  a  multitude  and  variety  of 
applications.  But  while  a  single  word  may  thus  come  to  have  many 
meanings,  it  also  happens  that  a  number  of  diiferent  Vv^ords  are  used 
to  designate  the  same,  or  nearly  the  same,  thing.  By  such  a  multi- 
plication of  terms  a  language  becomes  greatly  enriched,  and  capable 
of  expressing  more  minutely  the  different  shades  and  aspects  of  any 

particular  idea.     Thus  in  English  we  have  the  words  „ 

^  .  7  ,  y  Several  words 

wonder,  siayrise,  admiration,  astotiis/im.enf,  and  amaze-   of  like  mean- 

inenf,  all  conveying  the  same  general  thought,  but  distin-  ^^^' 

guishable  by  different  shades  of  meaning.     The  same  is  true  of  the 

words  axiom,  maxim,  ajjhorism,  apothegm,  adage,  proverb,  byword, 

saying,   and   saio.     Such  words   are   called    synonymes,   and  they 

abound  in  all  cultivated  languages.     The  biblical  interpreter  needs 

discernment  and  skill  to  determine  the  nice  distinctions  and  shades 

of  meaning  attaching  to  Hebrew  and  Greek  synonymes.     Often  the 

exact  point  and  pith  of  a  passage  will  be  missed  by  failing  to  make 

the  proper  discrimination  between  synonymous  expressions.     There 


193  PRIXCTPLES   OP 

are,  for  instance,  eleven  diffei-ent  Hebrew  words  used  in  the  Old 
Testament  for  kindling  a  Jire,  or  setting  on  Jire,^  and  seven  Greek 
words  used  in  the  New  Testament  for  prayer ;'^  and  yet  a  careful 
study  of  these  several  terms  will  show  that  they  all  vary  somewhat 
in  signification,  and  serve  to  set  forth  so  many  different  shades  of 
thouglit  or  meaning. 

AVe  take,  for  illustration,  the  different  Hebrew  words  which  are 
used  to  convey  the  general  idea  of  killing,  or  putting 
for  putting  to   to  death.     The  verb  ^Pi?  occurs  but  three  times  in  the 
death.  Hebrew  Scriptures,  and  means  in  every  case  to  kill  by 

putting  an  end  to  one's  existence.  The  three  instances  are  the  fol- 
lowing: Job  xiii,  15,  "If  he  kill  me,"  or  "Lo,  let  him  kill  me;"  and 
Job  xxiv,  14,  "At  light  will  the  murderer  rise  up;  he  will  kill  the 
poor  and  needy;"  and  Psa.  cxxxix,  19,  "Thou  wilt  kill  the  wicked, 
,  O  God."     The  primary  idea  of  the  word,  according  to 

-^  Gesenius,  is  that  of  cutting  ;  hence  cutting  off;  making 

an  end  of  by  destruction.  So  the  noun  h^\>^  is  used  in  Obadiah  9  in 
connexion  with  TTQ,  cut  off — "shall  be  cut  off  by  slaughter ;''  i.  e., 
by  a  general  destruction.  In  the  Chaldee  chapters  of  Daniel  the 
verb  ^tpp  is  used  in  a  variety  of  foi-ms  seven  times,  but  it  seems  to 
retain  in  every  instance  essentially  the  same  meaning  as  the  Hebrew 
verb.  The  simple  fact  of  the  killijig  or  cutting  off  is  stated  without 
any  necessary  irai^lication  as  to  the  method  or  occasion  of  the  act. 
The  word  more  commonly  used  to  denote  jnitting  to  death  is  (the 
-.,p_  Iliphil,  Ilophal,  and  some  of  the  rarer  forms  of)  rm,  to 
«.J-  <-^i'&-  The  grammatical  structure  of  the  lanoruage  en- 
ables  us  at  once  to  perceive  that  the  prnnary  idea  m 
the  use  of  this  word  is  that  of  causing  to  die.  Thus,  in  Josh,  x,  20 
and  xi,  IV,  it  is  used  to  denote  the  result  of  violent  smiting  (n33) : 
"Joshua  smote  them  and  caused  them  to  die;''''  "All  their  kings  lie 
took,  and  he  smote  them  and  caused  them  to  die.''''  Compare  1  Sam. 
xvii,  50;  xxii,  18;  2  Sara,  xviii,  15  ;  2  Kings  xv,  10,  14.  In  short, 
the  distinguishing  idea  of  this  Avord,  as  used  for  killing,  is  that  of 
putting  to  death,  or  causing  to  die,  by  some  violent  and  deadly 
measure.  In  this  sense  the  word  is  used  in  the  Old  'Testament 
Scriptures  over  two  hundred  tiirics.  The  prominent  thought  in  7l?i^ 
is  merely  that  of  cutting  off;  getting  one  out  of  the  way ;  while  in 
n^pn  and  n'3in  the  idea  of  death,  as  the  result  of  some  fatal  means 
and  procedure,  is  more  noticeable.  Tlie  murderer  or  tlie  assassin 
kills  \?^\>)  his  victim  or  enemy;  the  warrior,  the  ruler,  and  the  Lord 
himself,  causes  to  die,  or  puts  to  death  (JT'Jpn)  Avhom  he  will,  and  he 

'  Namely:  "ilX,  I^D,  pH,  mn,  m'\  '^\>\  DH^,  pl''^,  mp,  "lt3p,  ^"i^- 
'  'Evxv,  7Tpoaevx>'/,  6ej/aig,  Ivtev^i^,  EvxnpioTla,  al-rifia,  and  iKeTjjpla. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  193 

perforins  the  act  by  some  certain  means  (specified  or  unspecified), 
which  will  accomplish  the  desired  result.  The  latter  word  is  ac- 
cordingly used  of  public  executions,  the  slaughter  involved  in  war 
and  the  putting  to  death  for  the  maintenance  of  some  principle 
or  the  attainment  of  some  ulterior  end.  It  is  never  used  to  ex- 
press the  idea  of  murder ;  but  God  himself  says :  "  I  put  to  death  " 
(Deut.  xxxii,  39).  Compare  1  Sam.  ii,  6 ;  2  Kino-s  v  7  *  Hosea 
ix,  IG. 

Another  word  for  killing  is  J"in.     Unlike  fl^on,  it  may  be  used  for 
private  homicide,  or  murder  (Gen.  iv,  8;  xxvii,  41),  or 
assassination  (2  Chron.  xxiv,  25  ;  2  Kino-s  x,  9),  or  gen-  "'^ 

eral  slaughter  and  massacre  (Judges  viii,  11;  Esther  ix,  15).  The 
slaying  it  denotes  may  be  done  by  the  sword  (1  Kings  ii,  32),  or  by 
a  stone  (Judges  ix,  54),  or  a  spear  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  21),  or  by  the  word 
of  Jehovah  (Hos.  vi,  5),  or  even  by  grief,  or  a  viper's  tongue  (Job 
v,"2;  XX,  16).  But  the  characterizing  idea  of  the  word,  as  distin- 
guished from  n^pn  and  b^\>,  seems  to  be  that  of  wholesale  or  vengeful 
slaughter.  Thus  Jehovah  slew  all  the  firstborn  of  Egypt  (Exod. 
xiii,  15),  but  the  slaughter  was  a  vengeful  judgment-stroke,  a 
plague.  Thus  Simeon  and  Levi  slew  the  men  of  Shechera,  and  that 
slaughter  was  a  cruel  and  vindictive  massacre  (Gen.  xxxiv,  26 ; 
xlix,  6).  This  word  is  used  of  the  slaughter  of  Jehovah's  prophets 
by  Jezebel,  and  of  the  prophets  of  Baal  by  Elijah  (1  Kings  xix, 
1,  10),  and  in  this  sense  generally,  whether  the  numbers  slain  be 
few  or  many.  Compare  Jiidges  viii,  IV,  21;  Esther  ix,  6,  10,  12; 
Ezek.  ix,  6.  In  Isa.  xxii,  13  the  word  is  used  of  the  slaughter 
of  oxen,  but  the  context  shows  that  the  slaughter  contemplated 
was  on  a  large  scale,  at  a  time  of  feasting  and  revelry.  So, 
again,  in  Psa,  Ixxviii,  47,  we  read:  "He  slays  with  hail  their 
vines,"  but  the  passage  is  poetical,  and  the  thought  is  that  of  a 
sweej^ing  destruction,  by  which  vines  and  trees,  as  well  as  other 
things  that  suffered  in  the  plagues  of  Egypt,  were,  so  to  speak, 
slaughtered. 

nVT  has  the  primary  signification  of  crushing,  a  violent  breaking 
in  pieces,  and  is  generally  used  to  denote  the  act  of 
miirder  or  numslavghter  in  any  degree.      This  is  the 
word  used  in  the  commandment,  "  Thou  shalt  not  commit  murder  " 
(Exod.  XX,  13;  Deut.  v,  17);  less  properly  translated,  "Thou  shalt 
not  Idll^''  for  often  to  hill  is  not  necessarily  to  murder.     In  Num. 
XXXV  the  participial  form  of  tlie  word  is  used  over  a  dozen  times 
to  denote  the  manslayer,  who  flees  to  a  city  of  refuge,  and  twice 
(verses  27,  30)  the  verb  is  used  to  denote  the  execution   of  such 
manslayer  by  the  avenger  of  blood. 
13 


194  PRINCIPLES   OF 

The  "word  nnD  is  used  for  the  slaying  of  miimals,  especially  in 
preparation  for  a  feast.  It  corresponds  more  nearly  with 
the  word  butcher.  Thus,  when  Joseph's  brethren  came, 
brino-ino-  Benjamin  with  them,  Joseph  commanded  the  ruler  of  his 
house  to  bring  the  men  to  the  house,  and  kill  a  killing  (n3'0  nip, 
Gen.  xliii,  16).  Compare  1  Sam.  xxv,  11;  Prov.  ix,  2.  When  the 
word  is  applied  to  the  slaughter  of  men  it  is  always  with  the  idea 
that  they  are  slaughtered  or  butchered  like  so  many  animals  (Psa. 
xxxvii,  14;  Jer.  li,  40;  Lam.  ii,  21;  Ezek.  xxi,  10,  (lo). 

A  kindred  word  is  n3T,  used  of  the  sacrificing  of  animals  for  offer- 
ings. It  is  thus  ever  associated  with  the  idea  of  im- 
molation, and  the  derivative  noun  nni  means  a  sacrificial 
offering  to  God.  *'  This  verb,"  says  Gesenius,  *'  is  not  used  of  the 
priests  as  slaughtering  victims  in  sacrifice,  but  of  private  persons 
offering  sacrifices  at  their  own  cost."  Compare  Gen.  xxxi,  54;  Exod. 
viii,  29,  (25);  1  Sam.  xi,  15;  2  Chron.  vii,  4;  xxxiii,  17;  Ezek.  xx, 
28;  lios.  xiii,  2;  Jon.  i,  16. 

Another  word,  constantly  used  in  connection  with  the  kilUng  of 
v.p.f^  animals  for  sacrifice,  is  Drit?^;  but  it  differs  from  n3T 
especially  in  this,  that  the  latter  emphasizes  rather  the 
idea  of  sacrifice,  while  tint?^  points  more  directly  to  the  slaughter  of 
the  victim.  Hence  n^T  is  often  used  intransitively,  in  the  sense 
of  offering  sacrifice,  without  specifying  the  object  sacrificed;  but 
£2nL*>  is  always  transitive,  and  connected  Avith  the  object  slain. 
This  latter  word  is  often  applied  to  the  slaying  of  persons  (Gen. 
xxii,  10;  1  Kings  xviii,  40;  2  Kings  x,  7,  14;  Isa.  Ivii,  5;  Ezek. 
xvi,  21),  but  in  a  sacrificial  sense,  as  the  immediate  context  shows. 
Judg.  xii,  6,  would  seem  to  be  an  exception,  but  the  probable 
thought  there  is  that  the  Ephraimites  who  could  not  pronounce  the 
"  Shibboleth  "  were  slain  as  so  many  human  sacrifices. 

Thus  cacli  of  these  seven  Hebrew  Avords,  all  of  Avhich  involve  the 
idea  of  killing  or  slauglder,  has  its  own  distinct  shade  of  meaning 
and  manner  of  usage. 

The  Hebrew  language  has  twelve  different  words  to  express  the 
Hebrew  words  idea  of  Sin.  First,  there  is  the  verb  NDH,  Avhich,  like 
for  sin.  |.]^g  Greek  ditaQ-dvo),  means,  primarily,  to  tniss  a  mark, 

and  is  so  used  (in  lliphil)  in  Judg.  xx,  16,  Avhere  mention  is  made 
of  seven  hundred  left  handed  Benjamites  avIio  could  sling  stones 

w..^-         "  to  the  hair,  and  not  miss."     In  Prov.  viii,  36,  it  is  con- 

Xun 

trasted  with.NVO,  to  find  (verse  35):  "They  that  find 
me,  find  life;  .  .  .  and  he  that  misses  me  wrongs  his  soul."  Com- 
pare also  Prov.  xix,  2:  "lie  that  hastens  with  his  feet  misses;" 
that  is,  makes  a  misstep;  gets  off  the  track.     Tlie  exact  meaning 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  195 

in  Job  V,  24,  is  more  doubtful:  "Thou  shalt  visit  thy  pasture  (or 
habitation),  and  shalt  not  miss."  The  sense,  according  to  most  in- 
terpreters, is:  Thou  shalt  miss  nothing;  in  visiting  thy  pasture  and 
thy  flocks  thou  shalt  find  nothing  gone;  no  sheep  or  cattle  missine:. 
It  is  easy  to  see  how  the  idea  of  making  a  misstep,  or  missino-  a 
mark,  passed  over  into  the  moral  idea  of  missing  some  di^-inelj^  ap- 
pointed mark;  hence  failure,  error,  shortcoming,  an  action  that  lias 
miscarried.  Accordingly,  the  noun  >?pn  means  fault,  error,  sin.  It 
is  interesting  to  note  how  the  Piel,  or  intensive  form  of  the  verb 
NDn,  conveys  the  idea  of  making  an  offering  for  sin  (compare  Lev. 
vi,  26,  (19);  ix,  15),  or  cleanshig  hj  s>ov[ie  ceremonial  of  atonement 
(Exod.  xxix,  36;  Lev.  xiv,  62);  as  if  the  thought  of  bearing  the 
penalty  of  sin,  and  making  it  appear  loathsome  and  damnable,  were 
to  be  made  conspicuous  by  an  intense  efi^ort  to  purge  away  its  guilt 
and  shame.  Hence  arose  the  common  usage  of  the  noun  DN'^n  in 
the  sense  of  sin  offering. 

We  should  next  compare  the  words  \SV,  h)V,  and  \\^.     The  first  is 

from  the  root  my    to  twist,  to  make  crooked.,  to  distort,     •„  ( ...       ■, 
.  ''''  '  py,  ?iy,  and 

and  signifies  onoral  perversity.     In  the  English  version    ^    " 

it  is  commonly  translated  iniquity.  It  indicates  the  in-  •'■ 
herent  badness  of  a  perverted  soul,  and  in  Psa.  xxxii,  5,  we  have 
the  expression:  Thou  hast  taken  away  the  iniquity  (jiy)  of  my  siji  " 
(^nxtsn).  Closely  cognate  with  ji^  is  b)V,  from  the  root  b)V,  to  turn 
caoay,  to  distort,  and  would  seem  to  differ  from  it  in  usage  by 
being  applied  rather  to  outioard  action  than  to  inner  character;  jiy 
indicates  specially  what  a  sinner  is,  7)V,  what  he  does.  The  primary 
sense  of  |.1.^t,  on  the  other  hand,  is  emptiness,  or  nothingness.  It  is 
used  of  idolatry  (1  Sam,  xv,  23;  Isa.  xli,  29;  Ixvi,  3;  IIos.  x,  5,  8; 
Zech.  X,  2),  and  in  the  English  version  is  occasionally  translated 
va7iity  {J oh  XV,  35;  Psa.  x,  7;  Prov.  xxii,  8).  It  denotes  wicked- 
ness, or  sin,  as  something  that  has  no  enduring  reality  or  value.  It 
is  a  false,  vain  appearance;  a  deceitful  shadow,  destitute  of  stabil- 
ity. So,  then,  in  these  three  words  we  have  suggested  to  us  bad 
character,  bad  action,  and  the  emptiness  of  sinful  pursuits. 

The  word  which  especially  denotes  evil,  or  that  which  is  essen- 
tially bad,  is  VI,  with  its  cognate  V'l  and  nyn,  all  from 
the  root  yy^,  to  In'cak,  shatter,  crush,  crximhle.  It  indicates 
a  character  or  quality  which,  for  all  useful  or  valuable  purposes,  is 
utterly  broken  and  ruined.  Thus  the  noun  yn,  in  Gen.  xli,  19,  de- 
notes the  utter  badness  of  the  seven  famine-smitten  heifers  of 
Pharaoh's  dream,  and  is  frequently  used  of  the  wickedness  of  wrong 
action  (Deut.  xxviii,  20;  Psa.  xxviii,  4;  Isa.  i,  16;  Jer.  xxiii,  2; 
xliv,  22;  Hos.  ix,  15).  The  words  yi  and  nyn,  besides  being  frequently 


196  PRINCIPLES   OF 

employed  in  the  same  sense  (compare  Gen.  vi,  5;  viii,  21;  1  Kings 
ii,  44;  Jer.  vii,  12,  24;  Zech.  i,  4;  Mai.  ii,  17),  are  also  used  to  de- 
note the  evil  or  harm  which  one  may  do  to  another  (Psa.  xv,  3; 
xxi,  11;  XXXV,  4;  Ixxi,  13).  In  all  the  uses  of  this  word  the  idea  of 
a  ruin  or  a  breach  is  in  some  way  traceable.  The  wickedness  of 
one's  heart  is  in  the  moi-al  wrecJc  or  ruin  it  discloses.  The  evil  of  a 
sinner's  wicked  action  is  a  breach  of  moral  order. 

Another  aspect  of  sinfulness  is  brought  out  in  the  word  pyo  and 
u.  its  noun  ?yo.     It  is  usually  translated  trespass,  but  the 

fundamental  thought  is  treaclicry,  some  covert  and 
faithless  action.  Thus  it  is  used  of  the  unfaithfulness  of  an  adul- 
terous woman  toward  her  husband  (Num.  v,  12),  of  the  taking 
strange  wives  (Ezra  x,  2,  10),  of  the  oifense  of  Achan  (Josh,  vii,  1 ; 
xxii,  20;  1  Chron.  ii,  7),  and  generally  of  unfaithfulness  toward 
God  (Deut.  xxxii,  51;  Josh,  xxii,  16;  2  Chron.  xxix,  6;  Ezck.  xx, 
27;  xxxix,  23).  By  this  word  any  transgression  is  depicted  as  a 
plotting  of  treachery,  or  an  exhibition  of  unfaithfulness  to  some 
holy  covenant  or  bond. 

By  a  transposition  of  the  first  two  letters  of  7^0  we  ha^e  the 
fjnu  word  ?py,  Avhich  is  used  of  the  exhaustive  toils  of  mor- 

'  tal  life  and  their  attendant  sorrow  and  raisei'y.     In  Num. 

xxiii,  21,  and  Isa.  x,  1,  it  is  coupled  in  parallelism  Avith  |1|{,  empti- 
ness, vanity,  and  may  be  regarded  as  the  accompaniment  of  the 
vain  pursuits  of  men.  It  is  that  labour,  which,  in  the  book  of  Eccle- 
siastes,  where  the  w^ord  occurs  thirty-four  times,  is  shown  both  to 
begin  and  end  in  "vanity  and  vexation  of  spirit;"  a  striving  after 
the  wind  (Eccles.  i,  14;  ii,  11,  17,  19). 

The  word  1?^,  to  cross  over,  like  the  Greek  Tragaffaivo),  is  often 
used  metaphorically  of  passing  over  the  line  of  moral 
obligation,  or  going  aside  from  it.  Hence  it  corre- 
sponds closely  with  the  word  transgress.  In  Josh,  vii,  11,  15;  Judg. 
ii.  20;  2  Kings  xviii,  12;  IIos.  vi,  7;  viii,  1,  it  is  used  of  transgressing 
a  covenant;  in  Deut.  xxvi,  13,  of  a  commandment;  in  1  Sam.  xv,  24, 
of  the  word  (lit.,  mouth)  of  Jehovah;  and  in  Isa.  xxiv,  5,  of  the  laAv. 
Thus  words  of  counsel  and  warning,  covenants,  commandments, 
laws,  may  be  O'ossed  over,  passed  by,  icalked  away  from  ;  and  this 
is  the  peculiar  aspect  of  human  perversity  which  is  designated  by 
the  word  "13|?,  to  transt/ress. 

The  two  words  V*^B  aii<l  VDh  may  be  best  considered  together. 
UEVBandvyh  ^^^^*^  former  conveys  the  idea  of  revolt,  rebellion;  the 
"  ^  "  '   latter  disttirbance,  titmnltuous  rage.     The  former  woi-d 

is  used,  in  1  Kings  xii,  19,  of  Israel's  revolt  from  the  house  of  Da- 
vid; ajid  in  2  Kings  i,  1;  iii,  7;  viii,  20,  22;  2  Chron.  xxi,  10,  of  the 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  197 

rebellions  of  Moab,  Edom,  and  Libnaii;  and  the  noun  VP^,  which  is 
usually  rendered  transgression^  should  always  be  understood  as  a 
fault  or  trespass  considered  as  a  revolt  or  an  apostasy  from  some 
bond  of  allegiance.  Hence  it  is  an  aggravated  form  of  sin,  and  in 
Job  xxxiv,  37,  we  find  the  significant  expression:  "He  adds  upon 
his  sin  rebellion."  The  primary  thought  in  J?^  may  be  seen  from 
Isa.  Ivii,  20,  where  it  is  said:  "The  wicked  (DY^nn)  are  like  the 
troubled  (^").!IJ,  tossed,  agitated)  sea;  for  rest  it  cannot,  and  its  waters 
will  cast  up  (lE^nJ',  ioss  about)  mud  and  mire."  So  also  in  Job 
xxxiv,  29,  the  Hiphil  of  the  verb  Vpl  is  put  in  contrast  with  the 
Hiphil  of  \2\>f,  to  rest,  to  be  quiet :  "  Let  him  give  rest,  and  who  will 
give  trovMef''  The  wicked  man  is  one  who  is  ever  troubled  and 
troubling.  His  counsels  (Psa.  i,  1),  his  plots  (Psa.  xxxvii,  12),  his 
dishonesty  and  robberies  (Psa.  xxxvii,  21;  cxix,  61),  and  manifold 
iniquities  (Prov.  v,  22),  are  a  source  of  confusion  and  disturbance 
in  the  moral  world,  and  that  continually. 

It  remains  to  notice  briefly  the  word  DK>X,  the  primary  idea  of 
which  seems  to  be  that  of  guilt  or  blame  involved  in  nf.>s,  and  njrv 
comiuitting  a  trespass  through  ignorance  or  negligence,  ~  '' 
and  nJt^  (KJ^',  y^,  with  which  it  is  frequently  associated.  The  two 
words  appear  together  in  Lev.  iv,  13:  "If  the  whole  congregation 
of  Israel  err  through  ignorance  O^P*^.),  and  the  matter  be  hidden 
from  the  eyes  of  the  assembly,  and  they  have  done  with  one  from 
all  the  commandments  of  Jehovah  what  should  not  have  been  done, 
and  have  become  guilty''''  {^iy3\^.  Compare  verses  22,  27,  and  chap- 
ter V,  2,  3,  4,  17,  19,  Hence  it  was  natural  that  the  noun  DL"« 
should  become  the  common  word  for  the  trespass  offering  which  was 
required  of  those  who  contracted  guilt  by  negligence  or  error. 
For  the  passages  just  cited,  and  their  contexts,  show  that  any  vio- 
lation or  infringement  of  a  divine  commandment,  whether  com- 
mitted knowingly  or  not,  involved  one  in  fault,  and  the  guilt,  con- 
tracted unconsciously,  required  for  its  expiation  a  trespass  offering 
as  soon  as  the  sin  became  known.  Accordingly,  it  will  be  seen  that 
T\y^,  and  its  derivatives,  point  to  errors  committed  through  igno- 
rance (Job  vi,  24;  Num.  xv,  27),  while  D^X  denotes  rather  the 
guiltiness  contracted  by  such  errors,  and  felt  and  acknowledged 
when  the  sin  Tsecomes  known. 

A  study  of  the  divine  names  used  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  is 
exceedingly  interesting  and  suggestive.  They  are  Ad- 
onai,  El,  Elah,  Elim,  Eloah,  Ellon,  Elohim,  Shaddai,  ^*^^°^  ''''""'■ 
Jah,  and  Jehovah.  All  these  may  be  treated  as  synonymes,  and 
yet  each  divine  name  has  its  peculiar  concept  and  its  correspond- 
ing usage. 


198  PRINCIPLES   OP 

Tlie  synonymes  of  the  New  Testament  furnish  an  equally  inter- 
esting and  profitahle  field  of  study.  Many  words  appear  to  be 
■used  interchangeably,  and  yet  a  careful  examination  will  usually 
show  that  each  conveys  its  own  distinct  idea.  Take,  for  instance, 
Kaivog  and  the  two  Greek  words  for  7ieio,  Kaivog  and  veog.  Both 
"^'^f-  are  ajDplied  to  the  new  man  (comp.  Eph.  ii,  15;   Col. 

iii,  10),  the  neic  covenant  (Heb.  ix,  15 ;  xii,  24),  and  neio  wine  (Matt, 
ix,  17;  xxvi,  29) ;  but  a  wider  comparison  shows  that  Kaivog  denotes 
what  is  new  in  quality  or  kind,  in  opposition  to  something  that  has 
already  existed  and  been  known,  used,  and  worn  out;  while  veog 
denotes  what  is  new  in  time,  what  has  not  long  existed,  but  is 
yoking  and  fresh.  Both  words  occur  in  Matt,  ix,  17:  "  They  put 
new  (yiov)  wine  into  new  (Katvovg)  skins."  The  new  wine  is  here 
conceived  as  fresh,  or  recently  made;  the  skins  as  never  used  be- 
fore. The  skin  bottles  may  have  been  old  or  new  as  to  age,  but 
in  order  to  preserve  wine  just  made,  they  must  not  have  been  put 
to  that  use  before.  But  the  wine  referred  to  in  Matt,  xxvi,  29,  is 
to  be  thought  of  rather  as  a  neio  kind  of  icine:  "I  will  not  drink 
henceforth  of  this  fruit  of  the  vine  until  that  day  when  I  drink  it 
with  you  new  (Kaivov,  new  in  a  higher  sense  and  qualitj'),  in  the 
kingdom  of  my  Father."  So  also  Joseph's  tomb,  in  which  our 
Lord's  body  was  laid,  was  called  a  new  one  {Kaivog,  Matt,  xxvii,  60 ; 
John  xix,  41),  not  in  the  sense  that  it  had  recently  been  hewn  from 
the  rock,  but  because  no  one  had  ever  been  laid  in  it  before.  The 
new  (KaivTj)  commandment  of  John  xiii,  34  is  the  law  of  love, 
which,  proceeding  from  Christ,  has  a  new  aspect  and  scope;  a  depth 
and  beauty  and  fulness  which  it  had  not  before.  But  when  John 
wrote  his  epistles  of  brotherly  love  it  had  become  "an  old  command- 
ment" (1  John  ii,  7),  long  familiar,  even  "the  word  which  ye  heard 
from  the  beginning."  But  then  he  (verse  8)  adds :  "  Again,  a  new 
commandment  (evroXi]v  KaivTqv)  I  write  to  you,  which  thing  is  true 
in  him  and  in  you;  because  tlie  darkness  is  passing  away  and  the 
true  light  is  already  shining."  The  i)assing  away  of  the  old  darkness 
and  the  growing  intensity  of  the  true  light,  according  to  proper 
Christian  experience,  continually  develop  ami  bring  out  new  glories 
in  the  old  commandment.  This  thing  (o),  namely,  the  fact  that 
the  old  commandment  is  also  new,  is  seen  to  be  true  both  in  Christ 
and  in  the  believer;  because  in  the  latter  the  darkness  keeps  ])ass- 
ing  away,  and  in  the  former  tlie  true  light  shines  more  and  more. 

In  like  manner  the  tongues  mentioned  in  Mark  xvi,  17  are  called 
Kaivai,  because  they  would  be  new  to  the  world,  "other  tongues" 
(Acts  ii,  4),  unlike  any  thing  in  the  way  of  speaking  which  had  been 
known  before.     So,  too,  the  new  name,  new  Jerusalem,  new  song, 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  199 

new  heaven  and  new  earth  (Rev.  ii,  17;  iii,  12;  v,  9;  xiv,  3;  xxi,  1), 
to  designate  which  Kaivog  is  used,  are  the  renewed,  ennobled,  and 
glorious  apocalyptic  aspects  of  the  things  of  the  kingdom  of  God. 
The  word  veog  is  used  nine  times  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels  of  wine 
recently  made.  In  1  Cor.  v,  7,  it  is  applied  to  the  new  lump  of 
leaven,  as  that  which  has  been  recently  prepared.  It  is  used  of  the 
new  man  in  Col.  iii,  10,  where  the  putting  on  the  new  man  is  spoken 
of  as  a  worh  recently  accomplished ;  whereas  KatvSg  is  used  in  Eph. 
ii,  15,  denoting  rather  the  character  of  the  loorh  accomplished.  So 
the  new  covenant  may  be  conceived  of  as  new,  or  recent  (Heb- 
xii,  24),  in  opposition  to  that  long  ago  given  at  Sinai,  while  it  may 
also  be  designated  as  new  in  the  sense  of  being  different  from  the 
old  (Matt,  xxvi,  28 ;  2  Cor.  iii,  6),  which  is  worn  out  with  age,  and 
ready  to  vanish  away  (Heb.  viii,  13).  Let  it  be  noted,  also,  that 
"  newness  of  life  "  and  "  newness  of  spirit "  (Rom,  vi,  4 ;  vii,"  6),  are 
expressed  by  Kaiv6rr](; ;  but  youth  is  denoted  by  vedrrjg  (Matt,  xix  20  ; 
Mark  x,  20 ;  Luke  xviii,  21 ;  Acts  xxvi,  4;  1  Tim.  iv,  12). 

The  two  words  for  life,  (3iog  and  ^w?^,  are  easily  distinguishable 
as  used  in  the  New  Testament.  Biog  denotes  the  pres-  ^.^  ^^^  .  , 
ent  human  life  considered  especially  with  reference  to 
modes  and  conditions  of  existence.  It  nowhere  means  lifetime,  or 
period  of  life;  for  the  true  text  of  1  Pet.  iv,  3,  which  was  supposed 
to  convey  this  meaning,  omits  the  word.  It  commonly  denotes  the 
means  of  living;  that  on  which  one  depends  as  a  means  of  support- 
ing life.  Thus  the  poor  widow  cast  into  the  treasury  her  whole 
livifig  {Plov,  Mark  xii,  44).  Another  woman  spent  all  her  livi?ig  on 
physicians  (Luke  viii,  14),  The  same  meanmg  appears  in  Luke 
XV,  12,  30;  xxi,  4,  In  Luke  viii,  14  and  1  John  iii,  17  it  denotes, 
rather,  life  as  conditioned  by  riches,  pleasures,  and  abundance.  In 
1  Tim.  ii,  2;  2  Tim.  ii,  4 ;  1  John  ii,  16  it  conveys  the  idea  of  the 
manner  and  style  in  which  one  spends  his  life ;  and  so,  in  all  its 
uses,  piog  has  reference  solely  to  the  life  of  man  as  lived  in  this 
world.  Zurj,  on  the  other  hand,  is  the  antithesis  of  death  {Sdvarog), 
and  while  used  occasionally  in  the  New  Testament  in  the  sense  of 
physical  existence  (Acts  xvii,  25  ;  1  Cor.  iii,  22;  xv,  19;  Phil,  i,  20; 
James  iv,  14),  is  defined  by  Cremer  as  "the  kind  of  existence  pos- 
sessed by  individualized  being,  to  be  explained  as  selfgovernin;/ 
existence,  which  God  is,  and  man  has  or  is  said  to  have,  and  which, 
on  its  part,  is  supreme  over  all  the  rest  of  creation."^     Tholuck 

■  Biblico-Theological  Lexicon  of  the  New  Testament,  p.  272.  Cremer  goes  on  to 
show  how  from  the  sense  of  physical  existence  the  word  is  also  used  to  denote  a  perfect 
and  abiding  antithesis  to  death  (Heb.  vii,  16),  a  positive  freedom  from  death  (Acts 
ii,  28;  2  Cor.  v,  4),  and  the  sum  of  the  divine  promises  under  the  Gospel,  "belonging 


300  PRINCIPLES   OF 

observes:  "The  words  ^(o-q  and  ■&dvarog  {death),  along  with  the 
cognate  verbs,  although  appearing  in  very  various  applications,  are 
most  clearly  explained  when  we  suppose  the  following  views  to 
have  lain  at  the  basis  of  them.  God  is  the  life  eternal  (^w^  aiwviog, 
1  John  V,  20),  or  the  li(//it,  {(piog,  1  John  i,  5;  James  i,  7).  Beings 
made  in  the  image  of  God  have  true  life  only  in  fellowship  with 
him.  "Wherever  this  life  is  absent  there  is  death.  Accordingly  the 
idea  of  ^(oiq  comprehends  holiness  and  bliss,  that  of  ■ddvarog  sin  and 
misery.  Now  as  both  the  ^w^  and  the  -^dvaroq  manifest  themselves 
in  different  degrees,  sometimes  imder  different  aspects,  the  words 
acquire  a  variety  of  significations.  The  highest  grade  of  the  ^w?/  is 
the  life  which  the  redeemed  live  with  the  Saviour  in  the  glorious 
kingdom  of  heaven.  Viewed  on  this  side,  ^co?^  denotes  continued 
existence  after  death,  communion  Avith  God,  and  blessedness,  of 
which  each  is  implied  in  the  other."* 

In  Jesus'  conversation  with  Simon  Peter  at  the  sea  of  Tiberias 
kya-inj  and  Mohn  xxi,  15-17),  we  have  four  sets  of  synonymes. 
^lUu.  First,  the  words  dyaTdcj  and  (piXeu),  for  which  we  have 

no  two  corresponding  English  words.  The  former,  as  opposed  to 
the  latter,  denotes  a  devout  reverential  love,  grounded  in  reason 
and  admiration.  (PiXeco,  on  the  other  hand,  denotes  the  love  of  a 
warm  personal  affection,  a  tender  emotional  love  of  the  heart.  "The 
first  expresses,"  says  Ti-ench,  "a  more  reasoning  attachment,  of 
choice  and  selection  {cliligere  =  deli.gere),  from  seeing  in  the  object 
upon  whom  it  is  bestowed  that  which  is  worthy  of  regard ;  or  else 
from  a  sense  that  such  was  fit  and  due  toward  the  person  so  regard- 
ed, as  being  a  benefactor,  or  the  like;  while  the  second,  without 
being  necessarily  an  unreasoning  attachment,  does  yet  oftentimes 
give  less  account  of  itself  to  itself ;  is  more  instinctive,  is  more  of 
the  feelings,  implies  more  passion."''  The  range  of  ^iXeu),  accord- 
ing to  Oremer,  is  wider  than  that  of  dyairdd),  but  dyandb)  stands 
high  above  (piXeu)  on  account  of  its  moral  import.  It  involves  the 
moral  affection  of  conscious,  deliberate  will,  and  may  therefore  be 
depended  on  in  moments  of  trial.  But  (piXiu,  involving  the  love  of 
natural  inclination  and  impulse,  may  be  variable.'     Obsevve,  then, 

to  those  to  whom  the  future  is  svire,  alreadj'  in  possession  of  all  who  are  partakers  of 
tlic  New  Testament  salvation,  '  that  leadeth  unto  life,'  and  who  already  in  this  life 
begin  life  eternal."  (Matt,  vii,  14;  Tit.  i,  2 ;  2  Tim.  i,  1;  Acts  xi,  18;  xiii,  48).  He 
further  observes,  that  in  the  writings  of  Paul  "  fwiy  is  the  substance  of  Gospel  preach- 
ing, the  final  aim  of  faith  (1  Tim.  i,  16);"  in  the  writings  of  .lohii  it  "is  the  subject 
matter  and  aim  of  divine  revelation."     Comp.  John  v,  b'J ;  1  John  v,  'Ai>;  etc. 

'  Commentary  on  Romans  v,  12. 

*  Syiionjmcs  of  tlie  New  Testament,  sub  verbo. 

'Comp.  Biblieo-Theological  Lexicon,  pp.  11,  12. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  201 

the  use  of  these  words  in  the  passage  before  us.  "  Jesus  says  to  Simon 
Peter,  Simon,  son  of  Jonah,  dost  thou  devoutly  love  (dyanag)  me  more 
than  these?  He  says  to  him.  Yea,  Lord,  thou  knowest  (oldag,  seest) 
that  I  tenderly  love  (^i/Lo))  thee."  In  his  second  question  our  Lord, 
in  tender  regard  for  Simon,  omits  the  words  more  than  these,  and  sim- 
ply asks:  "Dost  thou  devoutly  love  {aya-rrag)  me?"  To  this  Simon 
answers  precisely  as  before,  not  venturing  to  assume  so  lofty  a  love 
as  dyaTTixG}  implies.  In  his  third  question  (verse  17)  our  Lord  uses 
Simon's  word,  thus  approaching  nearer  to  the  heart  and  emotion  of 
the  disciple :  "  Simon,  son  of  Jonah,  dost  thou  tenderly  love  {(piXelg) 
me?"  The  change  of  word,  as  well  as  his  asking  for  the  third 
time,  filled  Peter  with  grief  [eXvnfjdi]),  and  he  replied  with  great 
emotion :  "  O  Lord,  all  things  thou  knowest  (olSag,  seest,  dost  per- 
ceive), thou  dost  surely  know  {yivo)OK£ig,  art  fully  cog-  oi6a  and  yi- 
nizant  of  the  fact,  hast  full  assurance  by  personal  vugku. 
knowledge)  that  I  tenderly  love  {(piXw)  thee."  The  distinction  be- 
tween oida  (from  eldo)^  to  see,  to  perceive)  and  yiv<l)aK<>)  (to  obtain 
and  have  knowledge  of)  is  very  subtle,  and  the  words  appear  to  be 
often  used  interchangeably.  According  to  Cremer,  "  there  is  mere- 
ly the  difference  that  yivojoKeiv  implies  an  active  relation,  to  wit,  a 
self -reference  of  the  knower  to  the  object  of  his  knowledge ;  where- 
as, in  the  case  of  eldevai,  the  object  has  simply  come  within  the 
sphere  of  perception,  within  the  knower's  circle  of  vision." '  As 
used  by  Peter  the  two  words  differ,  in  that  ycvojoKM  expresses  a 
deeper  and  more  positive  knowledge  than  olda. 

According  to  many  ancient  authorities  we  have  in  this  passage 
three  different  words  to  denote  lambs  and  sheep.  Li  verse  15  the 
word  is  dgvla,  lambs,  in  verse  16  nQojSara,  sheep,  and  in  'Apvic  7rp6/3a- 
verse  17  Trgofidna,  sheepUngs,  or  choice  sheep.  The  dif-  tu,  and  irpo- 
ference  and  distinct  import  of  these  several  words  it  is  /?«T'a. 
not  difficult  to  understand.  The  lambs  are  those  of  tender  age; 
the  young  of  the  flock.  The  sheep  are  the  full-grown  and  strong. 
The  sheepUngs,  npopdria,  are  the  choice  full-grown  sheej),  those 
which  deserve  peculiar  tenderness  and  care,  with  special  reference, 
perhaps,  to  the  milch-ewes  of  the  flock.  Compare  Isa,  xl,  11,  Then, 
in  connexion  with  these  different  words  for  sheej)  we  have  also  the 
synonymes  (36gko)  and  noiuaivo),  to  denote  the  various  Bogku  and 
cares  and  work  of  the  shepherd,  Bookg)  means  to  feed,  'n-oifxaivu. 
and  is  used  especially  of  a  shepherd  providing  his  flock  with  pas- 
ture, leading  them  to  the  field,  and  fui-nishing  them  with  food. 
Uoinaivo)  is  a  word  of  wider  significance,  and  involves  the  whole 
oflice  and  work  of  a  shepherd.     It  comes  more  nearly  to  our  word 

'  Biblico-Tlieological  Lexicon,  p.  230. 


202  PRINCIPLES   OF 

tend,  and  includes  the  ideas  of  feeding,  folding,  governing,  guiding, 
guarding,  and  whatever  a  good  shepherd  is  expected  to  do  for  his 
flock.  BocTKO)  denotes  the  more  special  and  tender  care,  the  giving 
of  nourishment,  and  is  appropriately  used  when  speaking  of  lambs. 
Hoiiiaivu)  is  more  general  and  comprehensive,  and  means  to  rule  as 
well  as  to  feed.  Hence  appear  the  depth  and  fulness  of  the  three- 
fold commandment:  "Feed  my  lambs,"  "Tend  my  sheep,"  "Feed 
my  choice  sheep."  The  lambs  and  the  choice  sheep  need  special 
nourishment;  all  the  sheep  need  the  shepherd's  faithful  care.  It 
is  well  to  note,  that,  on  the  occasion  of  the  first  miraculous  drauglit 
of  fishes,  at  this  same  sea  of  Galilee  (Luke  v,  1-10),  Jesus  sounded 
the  depths  of  Simon  Peter's  soul  (verse  8),  awakened  him  to  an  aw- 
ful sense  of  sin,  and  then  told  him  that  he  should  thereafter  catch 
men  (verse  10).  Now,  after  this  second  like  miracle,  at  the  same 
sea,  and  with  another  probing  of  his  heart,  he  indicates  to  him  that 
there  is  something  more  for  him  to  do  than  to  catch  men.  He  must 
know  how  to  care  for  them  after  they  have  been  caught.  He  must 
be  a  shepherd  of  the  Lord's  sheep  as  well  as  a  fisher  of  men,  and 
he  must  learn  to  imitate  the  manifold  care  of  the  Great  Shepherd 
of  Israel,  of  whom  Isaiah  wrote  (Isa.  xl,  1 1 ) :  "  As  a  shepherd  he 
will  feed  his  flock  {y}V,);  in  his  arms  he  will  gather  the  lambs  (CN^'l?), 
and  in  his  bosom  bear;  the  railch-ewes  (npy)  he  will  gently  lead." 

The  synonymes  of  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  Scriptures  have  been  as 
yet  but  slightly  and  imperfectly  treated.'  They  afford  the  biblical 
scholar  a  broad  and  most  interesting  field  of  study.  It  is  a  spiritual 
as  well  as  an  intellectual  discipline  to  discriminate  sharply  between 
synonymous  terms  of  Holy  Writ,  and  trace  the  diverging  lines  of 
thought,  and  the  far-reaching  suggestions  which  often  arise  there- 
from. The  foregoing  pages  will  have  made  it  apparent  that  the 
exact  import  and  the  discriminative  usage  of  words  are  all-import- 
ant to  the  biblical  interpreter.  Without  an  accurate  knowledge 
of  the  meaning  of  his  words,  no  one  can  properly  either  under- 
stand or  explain  the  language  of  any  author. 

'  The  only  works  of  note  on  the  subject  are,  Girdlestone,  Synonymes  of  the  Old 
Testament,  London,  ISYl;  and  Trem-h,  Synonymes  of  the  Xew  Tostiimcnt.  originally 
published  in  two  small  volumes,  and  subsequently  in  one ;  Ninth  Edition,  Loudon,  1880. 
The  work  of  Tittniann,  De  Synonyniis  in  Novo  Testamento,  translated  and  published 
in  two  volumes  of  the  Edinburgh  Bi))lii'al  Cabinet,  is  now  of  no  great  value.  Cre- 
nier's  niblico-Theological  Lexieon  of  the  New  Testament  eontains  a  very  excellent 
treatment  of  a  number  of  the  New  Testament  synonymes;  and  Wilson's  Syntax  and 
Synonymes  of  the  Greek  Testament  (Loudon,  1864)  is  well  worthy  of  consultation. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  203 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE    GRAMMATICO-HISTORICAL    SENSE. 

Having  become  familiar  with  the  meaning  of  words,  and  thoroughly 
versed  in  the  principles  and  methods  by  which  their  signification 
and  usage  are  ascertained,  we  are  prepared  to  investigate  the 
grammatico-historical  sense.  This  phrase  is  believed  to  have 
originated  with  Karl  A.  G.  Keil,  whose  treatise  on  Historical  In- 
terpretation and  Text-Book  of  New  Testament  Hermeneutics '  fur- 
nished an  important  contribution  to  the  science  of  in-  ^ 
terpi'etation.  We  have  already  defined  the  grammati-  historical 
co-historical  method  of  interpretation  as  distinguished  ^^^^^  deaned. 
from  the  allegorical,  mystical,  naturalistic,  mythical,  and  other 
methods,^  which  have  more  or  less  prevailed.  The  grammatico- 
historical  sense  of  a  writer  is  such  an  interpretation  of  his  lan- 
guage as  is  required  by  the  laws  of  grammar  and  the  facts  of  his- 
tory. Sometimes  we  speak  of  the  literal  sense,  by  which  we  mean 
the  most  simple,  direct,  and  ordinary  meaning  of  phrases  and  sen- 
tences. By  this  term  we  usually  denote  a  meaning  opposed  to  the 
figurative  or  metaphorical.  The  grammatical  sense  is  essentially 
the  same  as  the  literal,  the  one  exjjression  being  derived  from  the 
Greek,  the  other  from  the  Latin.  But  in  English  usage  the  word 
grammatical  is  applied  rather  to  the  arrangement  and  construction 
of  words  and  sentences.  By  the  historical  sense  we  designate, 
rather,  that  meaning  of  an  author's  words  which  is  required  by 
historical  considerations.  It  demands  that  we  consider  carefully 
the  time  of  the  author,  and  the  circumstances  under  which  he  wrote. 
"  Grammatical  and  historical  interpretation,  when  rightly  under- 
stood," says  Davidson,  "are  synonymous.  The  special  Davidson's 
laws  of  grammar,  agreeably  to  which  the  sacred  writers  statemeut. 
employed  language,  were  the  result  of  their  peculiar  circumstances; 
and  history  alone  throws  us  back  into  these  circumstances.  A  new 
language  was  not  made  for  the  authors  of  Scripture;  they  con- 
formed to  the  current  language  of  the  country  and  time.  Their 
compositions  would  not  have  been   otherwise   intelligible.      They 

'  De  historica  librorum  sacrorum  interpretatione  ejusque  necessitate.  Lps.,  KSS. 
Lehrbuch  der  Hermeneutik  des  N.  T.  nach  Gnindsiitzcn  der  grammatisch-histoiischcn 
Interpretation.     Lpz.,  1810.     A  Latin  translation,  by  Emmerliug,  appeared  in  1811. 

'  Compare  above,  pp.  1*73,  174. 


204  PRINCIPLES   OF 

took  up  the  21SUS  loqitendi  as  they  found  it,  modifying  it,  as  is  quite 
natural,  by  the  rehitions  internal  and  external  amid  which  they 
thought  and  wrote,"  The  same  writer  also  observes:  "  The  grara- 
matico-historical  sense  is  made  out  by  the  application  of  grammat- 
ical and  historical  considerations.  The  great  object  to  be  ascer- 
tained is  the  xisus  loquendi,  embracing  the  laws  or  principles  of 
universal  grammar  which  form  the  basis  of  every  language.  These 
are  nothing  but  the  logic  of  the  mind,  comprising  the  modes  in 
which  ideas  are  formed,  combined,  and  associated,  agreeably  to  the 
original  susceptibilities  of  the  intellectual  constitution.  They  are 
the  j)hysiology  of  the  human  mind  as  exemplified  jiractically  by 
every  individual.  General  grammar  is  wont  to  be  occupied,  how- 
ever, with  the  usage  of  the  best  writers;  whereas  the  laws  of  lan- 
guage as  observed  by  the  writers  of  Scripture  should  be  mainly 
attended  to  by  the  sacred  intei'preter,  even  though  the  philosoph- 
ical grammarian  may  not  admit  them  all  to  be  correct.  It  is  the 
xisus  loquouU  of  the  inspired  authors  which  forms  the  subject  of 
the  grammatical  principles  recognized  and  followed  by  the  expos- 
itor. The  grammar  he  adopts  is  deduced  from  the  use  of  the  lan- 
guage employed  in  the  Bible.  This  may  not  be  conformed  to  the 
practice  of  the  best  writers;  it  may  not  be  philosophically  just;  but 
he  must  not,  therefore,  pronounce  it  erroneous.  The  modes  of  ex- 
pression used  by  each  writer — the  utterances  of  his  mental  associa- 
tions, constitute  his  usus  loquendi.  These  form  his  grammatical 
principles;  and  the  interpreter  takes  them  as  his  own  in  the  busi- 
■.  iicss  of  exegesis.  Hence,  too,  there  arises  a  special  as  well  as  a 
^Smiversal  grammar.  Now  we  attain  to  a  knowledge  of  the  peculiar 
%csus  loquendi  in  the  way  of  historical  investigation.  The  religious, 
moral,  and  psychological  ideas,  under  whose  influence  a  language 
has  been  formed  and  moulded;  all  the  objects  with  which  the 
«^  writers  were  conversant,  and  the  relations  in  which  they  were 
placed,  are  traced  out  JiistoricaUy.  The  costume  of  the  ideas  in 
the  minds  of  the  biblical  authors  oricinated  from  the  character  of 
the  times,  country,  place,  and  education,  under  which  they  acted. 
Hence,  in  order  to  ascertain  their  peculiar  usus  loqicendi,  we  should 
*^  know  all  those  institutions  and  influences  whereby  it  was  formed  or 
affected."  ' 

The  general  j^rinciples  and  methods  by  which  we  ascertain  (he 
General princi-  '^'*''*^'  loquendi  of  single  terms,  or  words,  l)ave  been  j)re- 
piesandmeui-  scntcd  in  the  preceding  chapter.  Substantially  the 
^  ■  same  principles  are  to  serve  us  as  we  proceed  to  investi- 

gate  the    grammatico-historical   sense.     We   must   attend   to   the 
'  Davidson,  Sacred  Hermeneutics,  pp.  225,  22G. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  203 

ly 

definitions  and  construction  which  an  author  puts  upon  his  own  terms,  ^ 
and  never  suppose  that  he  intends  to  contradict  himself  or  puzzle 
his  readers.  The  context  and  connection  of  thought  are  also  to  be 
studied  in  order  to  apprehend  the  general  subject,  scope,  and  pur- 
pose of  the  writer.  But  especially  is  it  necessary  to  ascertain  the  T* 
correct  grammatical  construction  of  sentences.  Subject  and  predi- 
cate and  subordinate  clauses  must  be  closely  analyzed,  and  the 
whole  document,  book,  or  epistle,  should  be  viewed,  as  far  as  pos- 
sible, from  the  author's  historical  standpoint. 

A  fundamental  principle  in  gramiaati^Ojjiistorical  exposition  is 
that  Avords  and  sentenc.es„£aaJiaiJ3JmL_one_ji_gni^^^ 
tioii  in  one  and  the  same  connection.     The  moment  we   ^^^f"^? '^".*  ^'^'^ 

' _       ^^^^.  _     ,..-.-..--. — . — _— „« — „  ^^  ^  meaning  in  one 

neglect  this  jirinciple  we  drift  out  upon  a  sea  of  un-  place. 
certainty  and  conjecture.  It  is  commonly  assumed  by  the  univer- 
sal sense  of  mankind  that  unless  one  designedly  put  forth  a  riddle, 
he  will  so  speak  as  to  convey  his  meaning  as  clearly  as  possible  to 
others.  Hence  that  meaning  of  a  sentence  which  most  readily  sug- 
gests itself  to  a  reader  or  hearer,  is,  in  general,  to  be  received  as 
the  true  meaning,  and  that  alone.  Take,  for  example,  the  account 
of  Daniel  and  his  three  companions,  as  given  in  the  first  chapter  of 
the  Book  of  Daniel.  The  simplest  child  readily  grasps  the  mean- 
ing. There  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  general  import  of  the  words 
throughout  the  chapter,  and  that  the  writer  intended  to  inform  his 
readers  in  a  particular  way  how  God  honoured  those  young  men 
because  of  their  abstemiousness,  and  because  of  their  refusal  to 
defile  themselves  with  the  meats  and  drinks  which  the  king  had 
appointed  for  them.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  lives  of  the 
patriarchs  as  recorded  in  the  Book  of  Genesis,  and,  indeed,  of  any 
of  the  historical  narratives  of  the  Bible.  They  are  to  be  accepted 
as  a  trustworthy  record  of  facts. 

This  principle  holds  with  equal  force  in  the  narratives  of  miracu- 
lous  events.  For  the  miracles  of  the  Bible  are  re-  ^^^^^^-^^^  ^^  ^^ 
corded  as  facts,  actual  occurrences,  witnessed  by  few  or  iiteraUy  under- 
by  many  as  the  case  might  be,  and  the  writers  give  no 
intimation  that  their  statements  involve  any  thing  but  plain  literal 
truth.  Thus,  in  Josh,  v,  13-vi,  5,  a  man  appears  to  Joshua,  hold- 
ing a  sword  in  his  hand,  announcing  himself  as  "a  prince  of  the 
host  of  Jehovah"  (verse  14),  and  giving  directions  for  the  capture 
of  Jericho.  This  may,  possibly,  have  occurred  in  a  dream  or  a 
waking  vision;  but  such  a  supposition  is  not  in  strictest  accord  with 
the  statements.  For  it  would  involve  the  supposition  that  Josluxa 
dreamed  that  he  fell  on  his  face,  and  took  off  his  shoes  from 
his  feet,  as  well  as  looked  and  listened.     Revelations  from  Jehovah 


206  PRINCIPLES   OF 

were  wont  to  come  through  visions  and  dreams  (Xum.  xii,  6),  but 
the  simplest  exposition  of  this  jiassage  is  that  the  angel  of  Jehovah 
openly  a])peared  to  Joshua,  and  the  occurrences  were  all  outward 
and  actual,  rather  than  by  vision  or  dream. 

The  simple  but  mournful  narrative  of  the  offering  up  of  Jeph- 

t  ^.^  ^,  thah's  daughter  (Judg.  xi,  30-40)  has  been  perverted  to 
Jephthah's  t      i  i  i  •      t 

da  us  liter  a  mean  that  Jephthah  devoted  his  daughter  to  perpetual 

burnt-oiTering.  ^jj.gjj^j^-y — m^  exposition  that  arose  from  the  a  priori 

assumption  that  a  judge  of  Israel  must  have  known  that  human 
sacrifices  were  an  abomination  to  Jehovah.  But  no  one  presumes 
to  question  that  he  vowed  to  offer  as  a  burnt-offei'ing  that  which 
came  forth  from  the  doors  of  his  house  to  meet  him  (verse  31). 
Jephthah  could  scarcely  have  thought  of  a  cow,  or  a  sheep,  or  goat, 
as  cominof  out  of  his  house  to  meet  him.  Still  less  could  he  have 
contemplated  a  dog,  or  any  unclean  animal.  The  awful  solemnity 
and  tremendous  force  of  his  vow  appear,  rather,  in  the  thought 
that  he  contemplated  no  common  offering,  but  a  victim  to  be  taken 
from  among  the  inmates  of  his  house.  But  he  then  little  thouglit 
that  of  all  his  household — servants,  young  men,  and  maidens — his 
daughter  and  only  child  would  be  the  first  to  meet  him.  Hence 
his  anguish,  as  indicated  in  verse  35.  But  she  accepted  her  fate 
with  a  sublime  heroism.  She  asked  tAvo  months  of  life  in  which 
to  bewail  her  virginity,  for  that  was  to  her  the  one  only  thing  that 
darkened  her  thoughts  of  death.  To  die  unwedded  and  childless 
was  the  sting  of  death  to  a  Hebrew  woman,  and  especially  one 
who  was  as  a  princess  in  Israel.  Take  away  that  bitter  thought,  and 
with  Jei)hthah's  daughter  it  were  a  sublime  and  enviable  thing  to 
"  die  for  God,  her  country,  and  her  sire." 

The  notion  that,  previously  to  her  being  devoted  to  a  life  of  vir- 
ginity and  seclusion,  she  desired  two  months  to  mourn  over  such  a 
fate,  appears  exceedingly  improbable,  if  not  absurd.  For,  as  Cap- 
pellus  well  observes,  "  If  she  desired  or  felt  obliged  to  bewail  her 
virginity,  it  were  especially  suitable  to  bewail  that  when  shut  up  in 
the  monastery;  previously  to  her  being  shut  up  it  would  have  l)een 
more  suitable,  with  youthful  friends  and  associates,  to  have  spent 
those  two  months  joyfully  and  pleasantly,  since  afterward  there 
Avonld  remain  to  her  a  time  for  weeping  more  than  sufficiently 
long."  *  The  sacred  writer  declares  (verse  39)  that,  after  the  two 
months,  Jephthah  did  to  his  daughter  the  vow  tchich  he  had  voiced 
— not  something  else  which  he  had  not  voAved.  He  records,  not  as 
the  manner  in  which  he  did  his  vow,  but  as  the  most  thrilling  kuell 
ttat  in  the  ears  of  her  father  and  companions  sounded  over  that 

'  Critici  Sacri,  torn,  ii,  p.  2076. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTIC3.  207 

daughter's  funeral  pile,  and  sent  its  lingering  echo  into  the  later 
times,  that  "  she  knew  no  man."  ' 

The  narratives  of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  admit  of  no  rational 
explanation  aside  from  that  simple  grammatico-histori-  \ 

cal  sense  in  which  the  Christian  Church  has  ever  under-  rection  a  literal 
stood  them.  The  naturalistic  and  mythical  theories,  '"^toncai  fact. 
when  applied  to  this  miracle  of  miracles,  utterly  break  down.  The 
alleged  discrepancies  between  the  several  evangelists,  instead  of 
disproving  the  truthfulness  of  their  accounts,  become,  on  closer  in- 
spection, confirmatory  evidences  of  the  accuracy  and  trustworthi- 
ness of  all  their  statements.  If  the  New  Testament  narratives  aj-e 
deserving  of   any  credit  at  all,  the  following  facts  are  evident: 

(1)  Jesus  foretold  his  death  and  resurrection,  but  his  disciples  were 
slow  to  comprehend  him,  and  did  not  fully  accept  his  statements. 

(2)  Immediately  after  the  crucifixion  the  disciples  were  smitten  with 
deep  dejection  and  fear;  but  after  the  third  day  they  all  claimed 
to  have  seen  the  Lord,  and  they  gave  minute  details  of  several  of 
his  appearances.  (3)  They  affirm  that  they  saw  him  ascend  into  the 
heavens,  and  soon  afterward  are  found  preaching  "Jesus  and  the 
resurrection"  in  the  streets  of  Jerusalem  and  in  all  Palestine  and 
the  regions  beyond.  (4)  Many  years  afterward  Paul  declared  these 
facts,  and  affirmed  that  Jesus  appeared  at  one  time  to  above  five 
hundred  brethren,  of  whom  the  greater  part  were  still  alive  (1  Cor. 
XV,  6).  He  affirmed,  that,  if  Christ  had  not  been  raised  from  the 
dead,  the  preaching  of  the  GosjdcI  and  the  faith  of  the  Church  were 

'  "We  p;ain  nothing  by  attempting  to  evade  the  obvious  import  of  any  of  the  biblical 
narratives.  On  the  treatment  of  this  account  of  Jephthah's  daughter  Stanley  ob- 
serves :  "  As  far  back  as  we  can  trace  the  sentiment  of  those  who  read  the  passage, 
in  Jonathan  the  Targumist,  and  Josephus,  and  through  the  whole  of  the  first  eleven 
centuries  of  Christendom,  the  story  was  taken  in  its  literal  sense  as  describing  the 
death  of  the  maiden,  although  the  attention  of  the  Church  was,  as  usual,  diverted  to 
distant  allegorical  meanings.  Then,  it  is  said,  from  a  polemical  bias  of  Kimchi,  arose 
the  interpretation  that  she  was  not  killed,  but  immured  in  celibacy.  From  the  Jew- 
ish theology  this  spread  to  the  Christian.  By  this  time  the  notion  had  sprung  up  that 
every  act  recorded  in  the  Old  Testament  was  to  be  defended  according  to  the  stand- 
ard of  Christian  morality ;  and,  accordingly,  the  process  began  of  violently  wresting 
the  words  of  Scripture  to  meet  the  preconceived  fancies  of  later  ages.  In  this  way 
entered  the  hypothesis  of  Jephthah's  daughter  having  been  devoted  as  a  nun;  con- 
trary to  the  plain  meaning  of  the  text,  contrary  to  the  highest  authorities  of  the 
Church,  contrary  to  all  the  usages  of  the  old  dispensation.  In  modern  times  a  more 
careful  study  of  the  Bible  has  brought  us  back  to  the  original  sense.  And  with  it 
returns  the  deep  pathos  of  the  original  story,  and  the  lesson  which  it  reads  of  the 
heroism  of  the  father  and  daughter,  to  be  admired  and  loved,  in  the  midst  of  the 
fierce  superstitions  across  v.hich  it  plays  like  a  sunbeam  on  a  stormy  sea." — Lectures 
on  the  History  of  the  Jewish  Church.     First  Series,  p.  397. 


208  PRINCIPLES  OF 

1)'at  an  empty  thing,  based  upon  a  gigantic  fiilsehoorl.  This  con- 
ehision  follows  irresistibly  from  the  above-named  facts.  We  must 
either  accept  the  statements  of  the  evangelists,  in  their  plain  and 
obvious  imjjort,  or  else  meet  the  inevitable  alternative  that  they 
knowingly  put  forth  a  falsehood  (a  concerted  testimony  which  was 
essentially  a  lie  before  God),  and  went  preaching  it  in  all  the  world, 
ready  to  seal  their  testimony  by  tortures  and  death.  This  latter 
alternative  involves  too  great  a  strain  upon  our  reason  to  be  accept- 
ed for  a  moment,  especially  when  the  unique  and  straightforward 
Gospel  narratives  furnish  such  a  clear  and  adequate  historical  basis 
for  the  marvellous  rise  and  power  of  Christianity  in  the  world. 
Winer's  Grammar  of  the  New  Testament,  and  the  modern  critical 

.^^  commentaries  on  the  whole  or  on  parts  of  the  New  Testament — 
"-■^such  as  those  of  Meyer,  De  Wette,  Alford,  Ellicott,  and  Godet — 
have  served  largely  to  place  the  interpretation  of  the  Christian 
Grammatical  Scriptures  on  a  sound  grammatico-historical  basis,  and 
hDokecry°  m  ^  constant  use  of  these  great  works  is  all-important  to 
the  scriptures,  the  biblical  scholar.  He  must,  by  repeated  grammatical 
praxis,  make  himself  familiar  with  the  peculiarities  of  the  New 
Testament  dialect.  The  significance  of  the  presence  or  the  absence 
of  the  article  has  often  much  to  do  with  the  meaning  of  a  passage. 
"In  the  language  of  living  intercourse,"  says  Winer,  "it  is  utterly 
impossible  that  the  article  should  be  omitted  where  it  is  decidedly 
necessary,  or  employed  where  it  is  not  demanded.    "OQog  can  never 

VA  denote  the  mountain,  nor  rn  bQo<;  a  mountain.''''^  The  position  of 
words  and  clauses,  and  peculiarities  of  grammatical  structure,  may 
often  serve  to  emphasize  important  thoughts  and  statements.  The 
special  usage  of  the  genitive,  the  dative,  or  the  accusative  case, 
or  of  the  active,  middle,  or  passive  voice,  often  conveys  a  notable 
significance.  The  same  is  also  true  of  conjunctions,  adverbs,  and 
prepositions.  These  serve  to  indicate  peculiar  shades  of  meaning, 
"  and  delicate  and  suggestive  relations  of  words  and  sentences,  with- 
out a  nice  apprehension  of  Avhich  the  real  sense  of  a  i)assage  may 
be  lost  to  the  reader.  The  authorized  version  often  obscures  an 
important  passage  of  the  New  Testament  by  a  mistranslation  of  the 
aorist  tense.  Take,  as  a  single  example,  2  Cor.  v,  14:  "For  the 
love  of  Christ  constraineth  us;  because  we  thus  judge,  that  if  one 
died  for  all,  then  Avere  all  dead."  The  //"is  now  allowed  to  be  an 
error  in  the  text  and  should  bo  omitted.  The  verse 
ree      n  s.     gj^^^^^j^^l  ^-^^^^  l^^  translated:    "For  the   love   of   Christ 

constrains  us,  having  judged  this,  that  one  died  for  all ;  therefore 

the  all  died."     The  first  verb,  constrains  (ovvexei),  is  in  the  present 

'  New  Testament  Grammar,  p.  115.     Andover,  1874. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  209 

tense,  and  denotes  the  then  present  experience  of  the  apostle  at 
the  time  of  his  writing:  The  love  of  Christ  (Christ's  love  for  men) 
now  constrains  us  ("  holds  us  in  bounds  " — Meyer)  ;  and  this  is  the 
ever-present  and  abiding  experience  of  all  like  the  apostle.  Ilavinf/ 
judged  (Kpivavrag)  is  the  aorist  participle,  and  points  to  a  definite 
judgment  which  he  had  formed  at  some  past  time — probably  at,  or 
soon  after,  his  conversion.  The  statement  that  one  died  {drrsdavev, 
aorist  singular)  for  all,  points  to  that  great  historic  event  which, 
above  every  other,  exhibited  the  love  of  Christ  for  men.  "Apa  ol 
TTdvreg  dnsT^avov,  therefore  the  all  died— "the  all,"  who  meet  the 
condition  specified  in  the  next  verse,  and  "live  unto  him  Avho  for 
their  sakes  died  and  rose  again,"  are  conceived  as  having  died  with 
Christ.  They  were  crucified  with  Christ,  united  with  him  by  the 
likeness  of  his  death  (Rom.  vi,  5,  6).'  Compare  also  Col.  iii,  8: 
"  For  ye  died  (not  ye  are  dead),  and  your  life  is  hidden  {iceicpvnTai, 
has  become  hidden)  with  Christ  in  God."  That  is,  ye  died  at  the 
time  ye  became  united  with  Christ  by  faith,  and  as  a  consequence 
of  that  death  ye  now  have  a  spiritual  life  in  Christ. 

"  With  regard  to  the  tenses  of  the  verb,"  says  Winer,  "  New 
Testament  grammarians  and  expositors  have  been  guilty  of  the 
greatest  mistakes.  In  general,  the  tenses  are  employed  in  the  New 
Testament  exactly  in  the  same  manner  as  in  Greek  authors.  The 
aorist  marks  simply  the  past  (merely  occurrence  at  some  former 
time — viewed,  too,  as  momentary),  and  is  the  tense  employed  in 
narration;  the  imperfect  and  pluperfect  always  have  reference  to 
secondary  events  connected  in  respect  to  time  with  the  principal 
event  (as  relative  tenses) ;  the  pei'fect  brings  the  past  into  con- 
nexion with  the  present,  representing  an  action  in  reference  to  the 
present  as  concluded.  No  one  of  these  tenses,  sta-ietly  and  properly 
taken,  can  stand  for  another,  as  commentators  often  would  have  us 
believe.  But  where  such  an  interchange  appears  to  take  place, 
either  it  is  merely  apparent,  and  a  sufficient  reason  (especially  a 
rhetorical  one)  can  be  discovered  why  this  and  no  other  tense  has 
been  used,  or  it  is  to  be  set  down  to  the  account  of  a  certain  inac- 
curacy peculiar  to  the  language  of  the  people,  which  did  not  con- 
ceive and  express  relations  of  time  with  entire  precision."^ 

'  When  Christ  died  the  redeeming  death  for  all,  all  died,  in  respect  of  their  fleshly 
life,  with  him ;  this  objective  matter  of  fact  which  Paul  here  affirms  has  its  subjective 
realization  in  the  faith  of  the  individuals,  through  which  they  have  entered  into  that 
death-fellowship  with  Christ  given  through  his  death  for  all,  so  that  they  have  now, 
by  means  of  baptism,  become  burigd  with  him  (Col.  ii,  12). — Meyer,  in  loco. 

*  New  Testament  Grammar,  p.  264.     Comp.  Buttmann's  Grammar  of  the  New  Test- 
ament Greek  ;  Thayer's  Translation,  pp.  194-206.     Andover,  1873. 
14 


2i0  PRINCIPLES   OF 

The  grammatical  sense  is  to  be  always  sought  by  a  careful  study 
and  application  of  the  well-established  principles  and  rules  of  the 
language.  A  close  attention  to  the  meaning  and  relations  of  words, 
a  care  to  note  the  course  of  thought,  and  to  allow  each  case,  mood, 
tense,  and  the  position  of  each  word,  to  contribute  its  part  to  the 
general  whole,  and  a  caution  lest  we  assign  to  words  and  phrases  a 
scope  and  conception  foreign  to  the  ksus  loqueiicU  of  the  language 
— these  are  rules,  which,  if  faithfully  observed,  will  always  serve 
to  bring  out  the  real  import  of  any  written  document. 


-♦♦♦- 


CHAPTER  VII. 

CONTEXT,    SCOPE,    AND    PLAN. 

The  grammatico-historical  sense  is  further  developed  by  a  study  of 

„    ,    ,  „  the  context  and  scope  of  an  author's  woi'k.     The  word 

Context,  Scope,  J^  .      .  zt      • 

and  Plan  de-   Context,  as  the  etymology  intimates  (Latin,  con,  together, 

^"^'*"  and  textus,  woven),  denotes  something  that  is  woven  to- 

\  /  gethcr,  and,  applied  to  a  written  document,  it  means  the  connexion 
of  thought  supposed  to  run  through  every  passage  which  consti- 
tutes by  itself  a  whole.  By  some  writers  it  is  called  the  connexion. 
The  immediate  context  is  that  which  immediately  ]^recedcs  or  fol- 
lows a  given  word  or  sentence.  The  remote  context  is  that  whicli 
is  less  closely  connected,  and  may  embrace  a  whole  paragrajdi  or 
section.  Tlie  scoj^e,  on  the  other  hand,  is  the  end  or  purpose  which 
the  writer  has  in  view.  Every  author  is  supposed  to  have  some 
object  in  Avriting,  and  that  object  will  be  either  formally  stated  in 
some  part  of  his  work,  or  else  apparent  from  the  general  course  of 
thonglit.  The  plan  of  a  work  is  the  arrangement  of  its  several 
parts;  the  order  of  thought  which  the  "writer  pursues. 

Tlie  context,  scope,  and  plan  of  a  Avriting  should,  therefore,  be 
y  studied  together;  and,  logically,  perhaps,  the  scope  should  be  first 
ascertained.  For  the  meaning  of  particular  parts  of  a  book  may  be 
fully  ai)prt'heiided  oidy  when  we  have  mastered  the  general  purpose 
and  design  of  the  whole.  The  plan  of  a  book,  moreover,  is  most 
intimately  related  to  its  scope.  The  one  cannot  be  fully  ap])rc- 
hended  without  some  knowledge  of  the  other.  Even  where  the 
scope  is  formally  announced,  an  analysis  of  the  plan  will  serve  to 
make  it  more  clear.  A  writer  who  has  a  well-defined  i)lan  in 
his  mind  will  be  likely  to  keep  to  that  plan,  and  make  all  his  nar- 
ratives and  ])articular  arguments  bear  upon  the  main  subject. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  211 

The  scope  of  several  of  the  books  of  Scriptui*e  is  formally  stated 
by  the  writers.  Most  of  the  prophets  of  the  Old  Test- 
ament state  the  occasion  and  purpose  of  their  oracles  books  formi.iiy 
at  the  beginning  of  their  books,  and  at  the  beginning  of 
particular  sections.  The  purpose  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs  is  anr 
nounced  in  verses  1-6  of  the  first  chapter.  The  subject  of  Eccie- 
siastes  is  indicated  at  the  beginning,  in  the  words  "Vanity  of 
vanities."  The  design  of  John's  Gospel  is  formally  stated  at  the 
close  of  the  twentieth  chapter:  "These  things  are  written  that  ye 
may  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God;  and  that  be- 
lieving ye  may  have  life  in  his  name."  The  special  purpose  and 
occasion  of  the  Epistle  of  Jude  are  given  in  verses  3  and  4:  "Be- 
loved, while  giving  all  diligence  to  write  to  you  of  our  common 
salvation,  I  found  (or  had)  necessity  to  write  to  you  exhorting  to 
contend  earnestly  for  the  faith  once  for  all  delivered  to  the  saints. 
For  there  crept  in  stealthily  certain  men,  who  of  old  were  fore- 
written  unto  this  judgment,  ungodly,  turning  the  grace  of  our  God 
into  lasciviousness,  and  denying  the  only  Master,  and  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ."  The  purport  of  this  is,  that  while  Jude  was  dili- 
gently planning  and  preparing  to  write  a  treatise  or  epistle  on  the 
common  salvation,  the  circumstances  stated  in  verse  4  led  him  to 
break  off  from  that  purpose  for  the  time,  and  write  to  exhort  them 
to  contend  earnestly  for  the  faith  once  for  all  (dna^,  only  once ; 
"no  other  faith  will  be  given." — Bengel)  delivered  to  the  saints. 

The   scope  of    some   books   must   be   ascertained  by   a  diligent  <^— 
examination  of  their  contents.     Thus,  for  example,  the   „, 

_  -^      '  rian  and  Scope 

Book  of  Genesis  is  found  to  consist  of  ten  sections,  of  Genesis  seer 
each  beginning  with  the  heading,  "  These  are  the  gen-  ™'  ^''*  '^°'^^^"'^- 
erations,"  etc.  This  tenfold  history  of  generations  is  preceded  and 
introduced  by  the  record  of  creation  in  chapter  i,  1-ii,  3.  The 
plan  of  the  author  appears,  therefore,  to  be,  first  of  all  to  recoi'd 
the  miraculous  creation  of  the  heavens  and  the  land,  and  then  the 
developments  (evolutions)  in  human  history  that  followed  that  cre- 
ation. Accordingly,  the  first  developments  of  human  life  and  his- 
tory are  called  "  the  generations  of  the  heavens  and  the  land " 
(chap,  ii,  4).  The  historical  standpoint  of  the  writer  is  "the  day" 
from  which  the  generations  (nn^in,  f/rovths)  start,  the  day  when 
man  was  formed  of  the  dust  of  the  ground  and  the  breath  of  life 
from  the  heavens.  So  the  first  man  is  conceived  as  the  product  of 
the  land  and  the  heavens  by  the  word  of  God,  and  the  word  N'lZl, 
create,  does  not  occur  in  this  whole  section.  "  The  day  "  of  chapter 
ii,  4,  which  most  interpreters  understand  of  the  whole  creative 
week,  we  take  rather  to  be  the  terminus  a  quo  of  generations,  the 


212  PRINCIPLES   OF 

day  from  which,  according  to  verse  5,  all  the  Edenlc  growths  be- 
gan; the  day  when  the  whole  face  of  the  ground  was  watered, 
when  the  garden  of  Eden  was  planted,  and  the  first  human  pair 
were  brought  togetlier.  It  was  the  sixth  day  of  the  creative  week, 
"  the  day  that  Jehovah  God  made  (niry,  in  the  sense  of  effected,  did, 
accomplished,  brought  to  completion)  land  and  heavens."  Adam 
was  the  "son  of  God"  (Luke  iii,  38),  and  the  day  of  his  creation 
was  the  point  of  time  when  Jehovah  Elohim  first  revealed  himself 
in  history  as  one  with  the  Creator.  In  chapter  i,  which  records 
the  beginning  of  the  heavens  and  the  land,  only  Elohim  is  named, 
the  God  in  whom,  as  the  plural  form  of  the  name  denotes,  centre 
all  fulness  and  manifoldness  of  divine  powers.  But  at  cliapter 
ii,  4,  Avhere  the  record  of  generations  begins,  we  first  moot  with  the 
name  Jehovah,  the  personal  Revealer,  who  enters  into  covenant 
with  his  creatures,  and  places  man  under  moral  law.  Creation,  so 
to  speak,  began  with  the  pluripotent  God — Elohim;  its  completion 
in  the  formation  of  man,  and  in  subsequent  developments,  was 
wrought  by  Jehovah,  the  God  of  revelation,  of  law,  and  of  love. 
Having  traced  the  generations  of  the  heavens  and  the  land  through 
Adam  down  to  Seth  (iv,  25,  26),  the  writer  next  records  the  out- 
growths of  that  line  in  what  he  calls  "the  book  of  the  generations 
of  Adam"  (v,  1).  This  book  is  no  history  of  Adam's  origin,  for 
that  was  incorporated  in  the  generations  of  the  heavens  and  the 
land,  but  of  Adam's  posterity  through  Seth  down  to  the  time  of 
the  flood.  Next  follow  "  the  generations  of  Noah  (vi,  9),  then 
those  of  his  sons  Shem,  Ham,  and  Japheth  (x,  1),  then  those  of  Shem 
through  Arphaxad  to  Terah  (xi,  10-26),  and  then,  in  regular  order, 
the  generations  of  Terah  (xi,  27,  under  which  the  whole  history 
of  Abraham  is  placed),  Ishmael  (xxv,  12),  Isaac  (xxv,  19),  P^sau 
(xxxvi,  1),  and  Jacob  (xxxvii,  2).  Hence  the  great  design  of  the 
book  Avas  evidently  to  place  on  record  the  beginning  and  the 
earliest  developments  of  human  life  and  history.  Keeping  in  mind 
this  scope  and  structure  of  the  book,  we  see  its  unity,  and  also 
find  each  section  and  subdivision  sustaininc:  a  logical  fitness  and 
relation  to  the  whole.  Thus,  too,  the  import  of  not  a  few  passages 
becomes  more  clear  and  forcible. 

A  very  cursory  examination  of  the  Book  of  Exodus  shows  us 
Plan  and  Scope  that  its  great  purpose  is  to  record  the  history  of  the 
of  Exodus.  Exodus  from  Egypt  and  the  legislation  at  Mt.  Sinai, 
and  it  is  readily  divisibk>  into  two  parts  (1)  chaps,  i-xviii  ; 
(2)  xix-xl;  corresponding  to  these  two  great  events.  But  a  closer 
examination  and  analysis  reveal  many  beautiful  and  suggestive  re- 
lations of  the  different  sections.     First,  we  have  a  vivid  narrative 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  213 

of  the  bondage  of  Israel  (chaps,  i-xi).  It  is  sharply  outlined  in 
chapter  i,  enhanced  by  the  account  of  Moses'  early  life  and  exile 
(chaps,  ii-iv),  and  shown  in  its  intense  persistence  by  the  account 
of  Pharaoh's  hardness  of  heart,  and  the  consequent  plagues  which 
smote  the  land  of  Egypt  (chaps,  v-xi).  Second,  we  have  the 
redemption  of  Israel  (chaps,  xii-xv,  21).  This  is  first  typified  by 
the  Passover  (chaps,  xii-xiii,  16),  realized  in  the  marvels  and  tri- 
umphs of  the  march  out  of  Egypt,  and  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea 
(xiii,  17-xiv,  31),  and  celebrated  in  the  triumphal  song  of  Moses 
(xv,  1-21).  Then,  third,  we  have  the  consecration  of  Israel 
(xv,  22-xl)  set  forth  in  seven  sections,  (l)  The  march  from  the 
Red  Sea  to  Rephidim  (xv,  22-xvii,  1),  depicting  the  first  free  activ- 
ities of  the  people  after  their  redemption,  and  their  need  of  special 
Divine  compassion  and  help.  (2)  Attitude  of  the  heathen  toward 
Israel  in  the  cases  of  hostile  Amalek  and  friendly  Jethro  (xvii,  8- 
xviii).  (3)  The  giving  of  the  LaAv  at  Sinai  (xix-xxiv).  (4)  The 
tabernacle  planned  (xxv-xxvii).  (5)  The  Aaronic  priesthood  and 
sundry  sacred  services  ordained  (xxviii-xxxi).  (O)  The  backslid- 
ings  of  the  people  punished,  and  renewal  of  the  covenant  and  laws 
(xxxii-xxxiv).  (7)  The  tabernacle  constructed,  reared,  and  filled 
with  the  glory  of  Jehovah  (xxxv-xl). 

These  different  sections  of  Exodus  are  not  designated  by  special 
lieadings,  like  those  of  Genesis,  but  are  easily  distinguished  as  so 
many  subsidary  portions  of  one  whole,  to  which  each  contributes 
its  share,  and  in  the  light  of  which  each  is  seen  to  have  peculiar 
significance. 

Many  have  taken  in  hand  to  set  forth  in  order  the  course  of 
thought  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  There  can  be  subject  and 
no  doubt,  to  those  who  have  closely  studied  this  epistle,  ^pi^^e^to  the 
that,  after  his  opening  salutation  and  personal  address,  Romans, 
the  apostle  announces  his  great  theme  in  verse  16  of  the  first  chap- 
ter. It  is  the  Gospel  considered  as  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation 
to  every  believer,  to  the  Jeio  first,  and  also  to  the  Gfeel^.  This  is  not 
formally  announced  as  the  thesis,  but  it  manifestly  expresses,  in  a 
happy  personal  way,  the  scope  of  the  entire  epistle.  "  It  had  for 
its  end,"  says  Alford,  "the  settlement,  on  the  broad  principles  of 
God's  truth  and  love,  of  the  mutual  relations  and  union  in  Christ 
of  God's  ancient  people  and  the  recently  engrafted  world.  What 
wonder,  then,  if  it  be  found  to  contain  an  exposition  of  man's  un- 
worthiness  and  God's  redeeming  love,  such  as  not  even  Holy  Scrip- 
ture itself  elsewhere  furnishes  ?  "  ^ 

In  the  develoj^ment  of  his  plan  the  apostle  first  spreads  out  before 
^  Greek  Testament ;  Prolegomena  to  Romans. 


214  PRINCIPLES   OF 

us  an  appalling  jjortraiture  of  the  heathen  "svorld,  and  adds,  that 
even  the  Jew,  with  all  his  advantage  of  God's  revelation,  is  under 
the  same  condemnation;  for  by  the  law  the  whole  world  is  involved 
in  sin,  and  exposed  to  the  righteous  judgment  of  God.  This  is  the 
first  division  (i,  18-iii,  20).  The  second,  which  extends  to  the  close 
of  the  eighth  chapter,  and  ends  with  a  magnificent  expression  of 
Christian  confidence  and  hope,  discusses  and  illustrates  the  propo- 
sition stated  at  its  beginning:  "Now,  apart  from  law,  a  righteous- 
ness of  God  has  been  manifested,  being  witnessed  by  the  law  and 
the  proi)hets,  even  a  righteousness  of  God  through  faith  of  Jesus 
Christ  unto  all  them  that  believe"  (iii,  21).  Under  this  head  we 
find  unfolded  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  and  the  pro- 
gressive glorification  of  the  new  man  through  sanctification  of  the 
Spirit.  Then  follows  the  apostle's  vindication  of  the  righteousness 
of  God  in  casting  off  the  Jews  and  calling  the  Gentiles  (chaps, 
ix-xi),  an  argument  that  exhibits  throughout  a  yearning  for  Is- 
rael's salvation,  and  closes  with  an  outburst  of  wondering  emo- 
tion over  the  "  depth  of  riches  and  wisdom  and  knowledge  of  God," 
and  a  doxology  (xi,  33-36).  The  concluding  chapters  (xii-xvi)  con- 
sist of  a  practical  application  of  the  great  lessons  of  the  epistle  in 
exhortations,  counsels,  and  precepts  for  the  Church,  and  numerous 
salutations  and  references  to  personal  Christian  friends. 

It  will  be  found  that  a  proper  attention  to  this  general  plan  and 
scope  of  the  Epistle  will  greatly  help  to  the  understanding  of  its 
^smaller  sections. 

Ilaving  ascertaiiied  the  general  °^^pe   nnd   flran   ftf  n   hnt^lr  nf 

Scripture,  we  are  more  fully  prepared  to  trace  the  context  iind  bear- 
Context  of  par-  ^"g^  ^f  its  purticiilar  parts.  The  context,  as  we  have 
ticuiar passages,  observed,  maybe  near  or  remote,  according  as  we  seek 
its  immediate  or  more  distant  connexion  with  the  particular  word 
or  passage  in  hand.  It  may  run  through  a  few  verses  or  a  whole 
section.  The  l^t  twenty-six  chapters  of  Isaiah  exhibit  a  marked 
unity  of  thought  and  style,  but  they  are  capable  of  several  subdivi- 
sions. The  celebrated  IMessianic  prophecy  in  chapters  Iii,  13-liii,  12, 
is  a  complete  wliole  in  itself,  but  most  unliappily  torn  asunder  by 
tlie  division  of  chapters.  But,  though  forming  a  clearly  defined 
section  by  themselves,  these  fifteen  verses  must  not  be  severed  from 
their  context,  or  treated  as  if  they  had  no  vital  connexion  with 
Avhat  precedes  and  what  follows  after.  Alexander  justly  condemns 
"  the  radical  error  of  supposing  that  the  book  is  susce])tible  of  dis- 
tribution into  detached  and  independent  parts."  '  It  has  its  divis- 
ions more  or  less  clearly  defined,  but  they  cling  to  each  other, 
'  Later  Prophecies  of  Isaiah,  p.  247.     New  York,  1847. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  215 

and  are  interwoven  with  each  other,  and  form  a  living  whole.  It 
is  beautifully  observed  by  Nagelsbach,  that  "chapters  xlix-lvii  are 
like  a  wreath  of  glorious  flowers  intertwined  with  black  ribbon ;  or 
like  a  song  of  triumph,  through  whose  muflied  tone  there  courses 
the  melody  of  a  dirge,  yet  so  that  gradually  the  mournful  chords 
merge  into  the  melody  of  the  song  of  triumph.  And  at  the  same 
time  the  discourse  of  the  prophet  is  arranged  with  so  much  art  that 
the  mourning  ribbon  ties  into  a  great  bow  exactly  in  the  middle. 
For  chapter  liii  forms  the  middle  of  the  entire  prophetic  cycle  of 
chapters  xl-lxvi."  ^ 

The  immediate  connexion  with  what  precedes  may  be  thus  seen : 
In  lii,  1-12,  the  future  salvation  of  Israel  is  glowingly  depicted  as 
a  restoration  more  glorious  than  that  from  the  bondage  of  Egypt 
or  from  Assyrian  exile.  Jerusalem  awakes  and  rises  from  the  dust 
of  ruin;  the  captive  is  released  from  fetters;  the  feet  of  fleet  mes- 
sengers speed  with  good  tidings,  and  the  watchmen  take  up  the 
glad  report,  and  sound  the  cry  of  redemption.  And  then  (verse  11) 
an  exhortation  is  sounded  to  depart  from  all  pollution  and  bondage, 
and  the  sublime  exodus  is  contrasted  (verse  12)  with  the  hasty 
flight  from  Egypt,  but  with  the  assurance  that,  as  of  old,  Jehovah 
would  still  be  as  the  pillar  of  cloud  and  fire  before  them  and  behind 
them.  At  this  our  passage  begins,  and  the  thought  naturally  turns 
to  the  great  Leader  of  this  spiritual  exodus — a  greater  than  JMoses, 
even  thouerh  that  ancient  servant  of  Jehovah  was  faithful  in  all  his 
house  (Num.  xii,  V).  Our  prophet  proceeds  to  delineate  Ilim  whose 
sufferings  and  sorrows  for  the  transgressions  of  his  people  far  tran- 
scended those  of  Moses,  and  whose  final  triumph  through  the  fruit 
of  the  travail  of  his  soul  shall  be  also  infinitely  greater.  . y/ 

The  much;;dispjated  passage  in  Matt,  xi,  12  can  be  properly  ex»^ 
plained  only  by  special  rega^-d  tn  the  cnntext.  Literally  Mntt  xi,  12 ex- 
translated,  the  verse  reads:  "From  the  days  of  John  gtofiiscii! 
the  Baptist  until  now,  the  kingdom  of  the  heajfens  text. 
suffers  violence  {(iid^erai),  and  violent  ones  are  seizing  upon  it," 
There  are  seven  different  ways  in  which  this  passage  has  been 
explained. 

1.  The  violence  here  mentioned  is  explained  by  one  class  of  in- 
terpreters as  a  hostile  violetice — the  kingdom  is  violently  persecuted 
by  its  enemies,  and  violent  persecutors  seize  on  it  as  by  storm. 
The  words  themselves  would  not  unnaturally  bear  such  a  mean- 
ing, but  we  find  nothing  in  the  context  to  harmonize  with  a  refer- 
ence to  hostile  forces,  or  violent  persecution. 

2.  Fritzsche    translates   (iid^srac   by   inagna   vi  praedicatur    (is 

1  Commentary  on  Isaiah,  lii,  13,  in  Lange's  Biblework. 


216  PRINCIPLES   OF 

proclaimed  with  great  power) ;  but  this  is  contrary  to  the  meaning 
of  the  word,  and  utterly  without  warrant. 

3.  The  most  common  interpretation  is  that  which  takes  fiid^erai 
in  a  good  sense,  and  explains  it  of  the  eager  and  anxious  struggles 
of  many  to  enter  into  the  new  kingdom  of  God.  This  view,  how- 
ever, is  open  to  the  twofold  objection,  that  it  does  not  allow  the 
word  (3cd^Erai  its  proper  significance,  and  it  has  no  relevancy  to  the 
context.  It  could  scarcely  be  said  of  the  blind,  the  lame,  the  lepers, 
the  deaf,  the  dead,  and  the  poor,  mentioned  in  verse  5,  that  they 
took  the  kingdom  by  violence,  for  whatever  violence  was  exerted 
in  their  case  proceeded  not  from  them  but  from  Christ. 

4.  According  to  Lange  "  the  expression  is  metaphorical,  denoting 
the  violent  bursting  forth  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  as  the  kernel 
of  the  ancient  theocracy,  through  the  husk  of  the  Old  Testament. 
John  and  Christ  are  themselves  the  violent  who  take  it  by  force — 
the  former,  as  commencing  the  assault;  the  latter,  as  completing 
the  conquest.  Accordingly,  this  is  a  figurative  description  of  the 
great  era  which  had  then  commenced."'  So  far  as  this  ex])osition 
might  describe  an  era  which  began  with  John,  it  would  cer- 
tainly have  relevancy  to  the  immediate  context;  but  no  such  era 
of  a  violent  bursting  forth  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  had  as  yet 
opened.  The  kingdom  of  God  was  not  yet  come;  it  was  only  at 
hand.  Besides,  the  making  of  both  John  and  Christ  the  violent 
ones,  in  the  sense  of  breaking  open  the  husk  of  the  Old  Testament 
to  let  the  kingdom  of  the  heavens  out,  is  a  far-fetched  and  most 
improbable  idea, 

5.  Others  take  I3cd(^e-ai  in  a  middle  sense:  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
violently  breaks  in — forcibly  introduces  itself,  or  thrusts  itself  for- 
ward in  spite  of  all  opposition.  This  usage  of  the  word  may  be 
allowed ;  but  the  interpretation  it  offers  is  open  to  the  same  objec- 
tion as  that  of  Lange  just  given.  It  cannot  be  shown  that  there 
was  any  such  violent  breaking  in  of  the  kingdom  of  God  from  the 
days  of  John  the  Bajitist  to  the  time  when  Jesus  spoke  these  words. 
Besides,  it  is  difficult,  on  this  view,  to  explain  satisfactorily  the 
(iiaorai,  violent  ones,  mentioned  immediately  afterward. 

G.  Stier  combines  a  good  and  a  bad  sense  in  the  use  of  0idi^eTai : 
"The  word  has  here  no  more  and  no  less  than  its  active  sense, 
which  passes  into  the  middle.  The  kingdom  of  heaven  proclaims 
itself  loudly  and  openly,  breaking  in  with  violence;  the  poor  are 
compelled  (Luke  xiv,  23)  to  enter  it ;  those  who  o})pose  it  are  con- 
strained to  take  offence.  In  short,  all  things  proceed  urgently  with 
it;  it  goes  with  mighty  movement  and  impulse  ;  it  works  effectually 

'  Commentary,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  217 

upon  all  spirits  on  both  sides  and  on  all  sides.  ...  Its  constrain- 
ing power  does  violence  to  all ;  but  it  excites,  at  the  same  time,  in 
the  case  of  many,  obstinate  opposition.  He  who  will  not  submit  to 
it,  must  be  offended  and  resist ;  and  he,  too,  who  yields  to  it,  must 
press  and  struggle  through  this  offence.  Thus  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  does  and  suffers  violence,  both  in  its  twofold  influence." ' 
Hence,  according  to  Stier,  the  violent  ones  are  either  good  or  bad, 
since  both  classes  are  compelled  to  take  some  part  in  the  genei'al 
struggle,  either  for  or  against.  This  exposition,  however,  is  with- 
out sufficient  warrant  in  the  history  of  the  time,  "from  the  days 
of  John  the  Baptist  until  now,"  and  it  puts  too  many  shades  of 
meaning  on  the  word  (Siaorai.  Besides,  this  view  also  has  no  clear 
relevancy  to  the  context. 

7.  We  believe  the  ti-ue  view  will  be  attained  only  by  giving  each 
word  its  natural  meaning,  and  keeping  attention  strictly  to  the  con- 
text. The  common  meaning  of  (3id^(>)  is  to  take  something  hy  force, 
to  carry  hy  storm,  as  a  besieged  city  or  fortress ;  and  it  here  refers 
most  naturally  to  the  violent  and  hasty  efforts  to  seize  upon  tlie 
kingdom  of  God  which  had  been  conspicuous  since  the  beginning  of 
the  ministry  of  John.  For  this  view  seems  to  be  demanded  by  the 
context.  John  had  heard,  in  his  prison,  about  the  works  of  Christ, 
and,  anxious  and  impatient  for  the  glorious  manifestation  of  the 
Messiah,  sent  two  of  his  disciples  to  put  the  dubious  question,  "  Art 
thou  he  that  is  coming,  or  look  we  for  another?"  (Matt,  xi,  2,  3). 
Jesus'  answer  (verses  4-6)  was  merely  a  statement  of  his  mighty 
works,  and  of  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  to  the  poor — Old 
Testament  prophetic  evidence  that  the  days  of  the  Messiah  were 
at  hand — and  the  tacit  rebuke :  "  Blessed  is  he  whosoever  shall  not 
be  offended  [aiiavdaXiadri  find  occasion  of  stumbling)  in  me,"  was 
evidently  meant  for  John's  impatience.  When  John's  disciples 
went  away  Jesus  at  once  proceeded  to  speak  of  John's  char- 
acter and  standing  before  the  multitudes:  When  ye  all  flocked 
to  the  wilderness  to  hear  John  preach,  did  ye  expect  to  find  a 
wavering  reed,  or  a  finely  dressed  courtier?  Or  did  ye  expect, 
rather,  to  see  a  prophet?  Yes,  he  exclaims,  much  more  than  a 
prophet.  For  he  was  the  Messiah's  messenger,  himself  prophe- 
sied of  in  the  Scriptures  (MaL  iii,  1).  He  was  greater  than  all  the 
prophets  who  were  before  him;  for  he  stood  upon  the  very  verge 
of  the  Messianic  era  and  introduced  the  Christ.  But,  with  all  his 
greatness,  he  misunderstands  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;  and  from  his 
days  until  now  the  kingdom  of  heaven  suffers  violence  from  many 
who,  like  him,  think  it  may  be  forced  into  manifestation.    That  king- 

'  Words  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  in  loco. 


218  PRINCIPLES   OF 

doni  comes  according  to  an  ordered  progress.  First,  the  prophets 
and  the  law  until  John — the  Elijah  foretold  in  Mai,  iv,  5.  John 
was  but  the  forerunner  of  Christ,  preparing  his  Avay,  and  Christ's 
manifestation  in  the  flesh  was  not  his  coming  in  his  kingdom. 
Herein,  we  think,  expositors  have  generally  misappreliended  our 
Lord's  doctrine.  Thus  Nast :  "  The  Lord  speaks  of  the  absolutely 
certain  and  momentous  fact  that  the  kingdom  of  heaven  has  come, 
proclaims  its  presence,  and  sends  forth  its  invitations  in  tones  not 
to  be  misunderstood  (verse  15)." '  We  believe,  on  the  contrary,  that 
this  is  a  grave  misunderstanding  of  our  Lord's  words.  He  neitlier 
says,  nor  necessarily  implies,  that  his  kingdom  has  come.  John's 
preaching  and  Christ's  preaching  alike  declared  the  kingdom  to  be 
at  hand,  and  not  fully  come.  Compare  Matt,  iii,  2  and  iv,  17.  But 
from  the  beginning  of  this  gospel  men  had  been  over  anxious  to 
have  the  kingdom  itself  appear,  and  in  this  sense  it  was  suffering 
violence,  both  by  an  inward  impatience  and  zeal,  such  as  John  him- 
self had  just  now  exhibited,  and  by  an  open  and  outward  clamour, 
such  as  was  exhibited  by  those  who  would  fain  have  taken  Jesus 
by  force  and  made  him  king  (John  vi,  15).  This  same  kind  of  vio- 
lence is  to  be  understood  in  the  parallel  passage  in  Luke  xvi,  16. 
The  preaching  of  "the  Gospel  of  the  kingdom"  was  the  occasion  of 
a  violence  of  attitude  regarding  it.  Eveiy  man  would  fain  enter 
violently  into  it. 

The  Avord  l3id^ETai,  accordingly,  denotes  not  altogether  a  hostile 
violence,  nor  yet,  on  the  other  hand,  a  commendable  zeal;  but  it 
may  combine  in  a  measure  both  of  these  conceptions.  Stier  finely 
says :  "  In  a  case  where  exegesis  perseveringly  disputes  which  of 
the  two  views  of  a  passage  cai)able  of  tAvo  senses  is  correct,  it  is 
generally  found  that  both  are  one  in  a  third  deeper  meaning,  and 
that  tlie  disputants  in  both  cases  have  both  right  and  wrong  in  their 
argument.""  The  word  in  question  may  combine  both  tlie  good  and 
the  bad  senses  of  violence  :  not,  however,  in  the  manner  in  which 
Stier  explains,  as  above,  but  as  depicting  the  violent  zeal  of  those 
who  would  hurry  the  kingdom  of  God  into  a  pi-emature  manifesta- 
tion. Such  a  zeal  might  be  laudable  in  its  general  aim,  but  very 
mistaken  in  its  spirit  and  plan,  and  therefore  deserving  of  rebuke. 

The  context  of  Gal.  v,  4,  mu  t  be  studied  in  order  to  apprehend 
Gal.  V,  4,  to  be  the  force  and  scope  of  the  words:  "  Ye  are  fallen  away 
untS^aLm-  ^™"^  grace."  The  apostle  is  contrasting  justiHcation 
text.  by  faitli  in  Christ  with  justification  by  an  observance 

of  the  law,  and  he  argues  that  these  two  are  opposites,  so  that  one 

'  English  Comnientary  on  Matthew,  in  loco. 
^  Words  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  on  Matt,  xi,  12, 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  219 

necessarily  excludes  the  other.  He  who  receives  circumcision  as  a 
means  of  justification  (verse  2)  virtually  excludes  Christ,  whose 
gospel  calls  for  no  such  work.  If  one  seeks  justification  in  a  law 
of  Avorks,  he  binds  himself  to  keep  the  whole  law  (verse  3) ;  for  ■ 
then  not  circumcision  only,  but  the  whole  law,  must  be  minutely 
observed.  Then,  with  a  marked  emphasis  and  force  of  words,  he 
adds :  "  Ye  were  severed  from  Christ,  whoever  of  you  are  being 
(assuming  to  be)  justified  in  law,  ye  fell  away  from  grace."  Ye  cut 
yourselves  off  from  the  system  of  grace  {ttj^  x'^9'-'^'^^) •  The  word 
grace,  then,  is  here  to  be  understood  not  as  a  gracious  attainment 
of  personal  experience,  but  as  the  gospel  system  of  salvation.  From 
this  system  they  apostatized  who  sought  justification  in  law,  j/ 

It  will  be  obvious  from  the  above  that  the  connexion  of  thought 
in  any  given  passage  may  depend  on  a  variety  of  con-  ^^ 

''  .  1  o  J         i.  J     ^  Xhe  connexion 

siderations.  It  may  be  a  historical  connexion,  in  that  may  be  instoi-N 
facts  or  events  recorded  are  connected  in  a  chronolog-  doKma«c°iogi- 
ical  sequence.  It  may  be  historico-dogmatic,  in  that  a  cai,  or  psycho- 
doctrinal  discourse  is  connected  with  some  historic  fact 
or  circumstance.  It  maybe  a  logical  connexion,  in  that  the  thoughts 
or  arguments  are  j^resented  in  logical  order;  or  it  may  be  psycho- 
logical, because  dependent  on  some  association  of  ideas.  This  latter 
often  occasions  a  sudden  breaking  off  from  a  line  of  thought,  and 
may  serve  to  explain  some  of  the  parenthetical  passages  and  in- 
stances of  anacoluthon  so  frequent  in  the  writings  of  Paul.  ^ 

Too  much  stress   cannot  well  be  laid  upon  the  importance  of 
closely  studying  the  context,  scope,  and  plan,     Many_a  importance  of 
passage  of  Scrii^ture  Avill  not  l»e  understood  at  all  with-   context? scope! 
out  the  help  afforded  by  the  context;  for  many  a  sen-  and  plan, 
tence  derives  all  its  point  and  force  from  the  connexion  in  which 
it  .stands.     So,  again,  a  whole  section  may  depend,  for  its  proper  /^ 
exposition,   upon   our  understanding   the    scope   and   plan   of    the 
writer's    argument.     How   futile    would   be    a    proof   text   drawn 
from  the  Book  of  Job  unless,  along  with  the  citation,  it  were  ob- 
served whether  it  were  an  utterance  of  Job  himself,  or  of  one  of  his 
three  friends,  or  of  Elihu,  or  of  the  Almighty !    Even  Job's  celebrated 
utterance  in  chapter  xix,  25-27,  should  be  viewed  in  reference  to  ^ 
the  scope  of  the  whole  book,  as  well  as  to  his  intense  anguish  and 
emotion  at  that  particular  stage  of  the  controversy.^ 

'  Some  religious  teachers  are  fond  of  employing  scriptural  texts  simply  as  mottoes, 
with  little  or  no  regard  to  their  true  connexion.  Thus  they  too  often  adapt  them  to 
their  use  by  imparting  to  them  a  factitious  sense  foreign  to  their  proper  scope  and 
meaning.  The  seeming  gain  in  all  such  cases  is  more  than  counterbalanced  by  the 
loss  and  danger  that  attend  the  practice.      It  encourages  the  habit  of  interpreting 


\ 


220  PRINCIPLES   OF 

"In  considering  the  connexion  of  parts  in  a  section,"  says  David- 
„  ,  .     ,  ,    ,   son,  "  and  the  anionnt  of  meaning  they  express,  acute- 

Critical  tact  '  .   .  &  j         i    ^      5 

and  ability  ness  and  Critical  tact  are  mucli  needed.     We  may  be 
needed.  ^^^^  ^^  ^^jj  ^y^Q  significations  of  single  terms,  and  yet  be 

ntterly  inadequate  to  unfold  a  continuous  argument.  A  capacity 
for  verbal  analysis  does  not  impart  the  talent  of  expounding  an 
entire  paragraph.  Ability  to  discover  the  proper  causes,  the  nat- 
ural sequence,  the  pertinency  of  expressions  to  the  subject  dis- 
cussed, and  the  delicate  distinctions  of  thought  which  characterize 
particular  kinds  of  composition,  is  distinct  from  the  habit  of  care- 
fully ti-acing  out  the  various  senses  of  separate  terms.  It  is  a 
higher  faculty;  not  the  child  of  diligence,  but  rather  of  original, 
intellectual  ability.  Attention  may  sharpen  and  improve,  but  can- 
not create  it.  All  men  are  not  endowed  with  equal  acuteness,  nor 
fitted  to  detect  the  latent  links  of  associated  ideas  by  their  outward 
symbols.  They  cannot  alike  discern  the  idiosyncrasies  of  various 
writers  as  exhibited  in  their  composition.  But  the  verbal  philolo- 
gist is  not  necessarily  incapacitated  by  converse  with  separate  signs 
of  ideas  from  unfolding  the  mutual  bearings  of  an  entire  ])aragrai)h. 
Imbued  with  a  philosophic  spirit,  he  may  successfully  trace  the 
connexion  subsisting  between  the  various  parts  of  a  book,  while  he 
notes  the  commencement  of  new  topics,  the  propriety  of  their  posi- 
tion, the  interweaving  of  argumentation,  interruptions  and  digres- 
sions, and  all  the  characteristic  peculiarities  exhibited  in  a  particular 
composition.  In  this  he  may  be  mightily  assisted  bj"-  a  just  per- 
ception of  those  particles  which  have  been  designated  enea  TT-epo- 
evra  [winged  words],  not  less  than  by  sympathy  Avith  the  spirit  of 
the  author  whom  he  seeks  to  understand.  By  placing  himself  as 
much  as  possible  in  the  circumstances  of  the  writer,  and  contem- 
plating from  the  same  elevation  the  important  jthenomena  to 
which  his  rapt  mind  was  directed,  he  will  be  in  a  favourable  po- 
sition for  understanding  the  parts  and  proportions  of  a  connected 
discourse."' 

Scripture  in  an  arbitrary  and  fanciful  way,  and  thus  furnishes  the  teachers  of  error 
with  their  most  fffeotivo  weaixm.  The  practice  ciuinot  be  defended  on  any  i)lea  of 
ncces.<ity.  The  plain  words  of  Scripture,  legitimately  interpreted  according  to  their 
projier  scope  and  context,  contain  a  fulness  and  comprehensiveness  of  meaning  suffi- 
cient for  the  wants  of  all  men  in  all  circumstances.  That  piety  alone  is  robust  and 
healthful  which  is  fed,  not  by  the  fancies  and  speculations  of  the  preacher  who  prac- 
tically puts  his  own  genius  above  the  word  of  (Jod,  but  by  the  i)ure  doctrines  and  pre- 
cepts of  the  Bible,  unfolded  in  their  true  connexion  and  meaning.  Barrows,  Intro- 
duction to  the  Study  of  the  IJil)le,  p.  455. 

'  Sacred  Hermeneutics,  p.  240.  \ 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS,  221 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

COMPARISON    OP    PARALLEL    PASSAGES. 

There  are  portions  of  Scripture  in  the  exposition  of  which  we  are 
not  to  look  for  help  in  the  context  or  scope.  The  Book  Some  parts  of 
of  Proverbs,  for  example,  is  composed  of  numerous  omioffTcaicon- 
separate  aphorisms,  many  of  which  have  no  necessary  text. 
connection  with  each  other.  The  book  itself  is  divisible  into  sev- 
eral collections  of  proverbs;  and  separate  sections,  like  that  con- 
cerning the  evil  woman  in  chapter  vii,  and  the  words  of  wisdom  in 
chapters  viii  and  ix,  have  a  unity  and  completeness  in  themselves, 
through  which  a  connected  train  of  thought  is  discernible.  But 
many  of  the  proverbs  are  manifestly  without  connexion  with  what 
precedes  or  follows.  Thus  the  twentieth  and  twenty-lirst  chapters 
of  Proverbs  may  be  studied  ever  so  closely,  and  no  essential  con- 
nexion of  thought  appears  to  hold  any  two  of  the  verses  together. 
The  same  will  be  found  true  of  other  portions  of  this  book,  which 
from  its  very  nature  is  a  collection  of  apothegms,  each  one  of  which 
may  stand  by  itself  as  a  concise  expression  of  aphoristic  wisdom. 
Several  parts  of  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes  consist  of  proverbs,  solilo- 
quies, and  exhortations,  which  appear  to  have  no  vital  relation  to 
each  other.  Such,  especially,  are  to  be  found  in  chapters  v-x. 
Accordingly,  while  the  scope  and  general  subject-matter  of  the 
entire  book  are  easily  discerned,  many  eminent  critics  have  de- 
S])aired  of  finding  in  it  any  definite  plan  or  logical  arrangement. 
The  Gospels,  also,  contain  some  passages  which  it  is  impossible  to 
explain  as  having  any  essential  connexion  with  either  that  which 
precedes  or  follows. 

On  such  isolated  texts,  as  also  on  those  not  so  isolated,  a  compar- 
ison of  parallel  passages  of  Scripture  often  throws  much  value  of  parai- 
light.  For  words,  phrases,  and  historical  or  doctrinal  lei  passages. 
statements,  which  in  one  place  are  difficult  to  understand,  are  often 
set  forth  in  clear  light  by  the  additional  statements  with  which  they 
stand  connected  elscAvhere.  Thus,  as  shown  above  (pp.  215-218), 
the  comparatively  isolated  passage  in  Luke  xvi,  16,  is  much  more 
clear  and  comprehensive  when  studied  in  the  light  of  its  context  in 
Matt,  xi,  12.  Without  the  help  of  parallel  passages,  some  words  and 
statements  of  the  Scripture  would  scarcely  be  intelligible.  As  we  as- 
certain the  ifsus  loquendi  of  words  from  a  wide  collation  of  passages 


922  PRINCIPLES   OF 

in  which  they  occur,  so  the  sense  of  an  entire  passage  may  be  elu- 
cidated by  a  comparison  with  its  parallel  in  another  place.  "  The 
employment  of  parallel  passages,"  says  Immer,  "  must  go  hand  in 
hand  with  attention  to  the  connexion.  The  mere  explanation  ac- 
cording to  the  connexion  often  fails  to  secure  the  certainty  that  is 
desired,  at  least  in  cases  where  the  linguistic  usage  .under  consider- 
ation and  the  analogous  thought  cannot  at  the  same  time  be  other- 
wise established."  ^ 

"  In  comparing  parallels,"  says  Davidson,  "  it  is  proper  to  observe 
a  certain  order.  In  tlie  first  place  we  should  seek  for  parallels  in 
the  writings  of  the  same  author,  as  the  same  peculiarities  of  con- 
ception and  modes  of  expression  are  liable  to  return  in  dilfcrent 
works  proceeding  from  one  person.  There  is  a  certain  configura- 
tion of  mind  which  manifests  itself  in  the  productions  of  one  man. 
Eacli  writer  is  distinguished  by  a  style  more  or  less  his  own;  by 
characteristics  which  would  serve  to  identify  him  with  the  emana- 
tions of  his  intellect,  even  were  his  name  withheld.  Hence  the 
reasonableness  of  expecting  parallel  passages  in  the  writings  of  one 
author  to  throw  most  light  upon  each  otiier."  " 

But  we  should  also  remember  that  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and 
The  Ribip  a  si-if-  •^®'^^'  Testaments  are  a  world  by  themselves.  Although 
interpreting  written  at  sundry  times,  and  devoted  to  many  dilier- 
ent  themes,  taken  altogether  they  constitute  a  self- 
interpreting  book.  The  old  rule,  therefore,  that  "  Scrijiture  must 
be  interpreted  by  Scripture,"  is  a  most  important  principle  of  sa- 
cred hermeneutics.  I>ut  we  must  avoid  the  danger  of  overstepping 
in  this  matter.  Some  have  gone  too  far  in  trying  to  make  Daniel 
explain  the  Revelation  of  John,  and  it  is  equally  possible  to  distort 
a  passage  in  Kings  or  in  Chronicles  by  attempting  to  make  it  par- 
allel with  some  statement  of  Paul.  In  general  we  may  expect  to 
find  the  most  valuable  parallels  in  books  of  the  same  class.  TTistor- 
ical  passages  will  be  likely  to  be  paralleled  with  historical,  prophetic 
with  prophetic,  poetic  with  poetic,  and  argumentative  and  horta- 
tory with  those  of  like  character.  Hosea  and  Amos  will  be  likely 
to  have  more  in  common  than  Genesis  and  Proverbs;  Matthew  and 
Luke  will  be  expected  to  be  more  alike  than  Matthew  and  one  of 
the  Papist les  of  Paul,  and  Paul's  Epistles  naturally  exhibit  many 
parallels  both  of  thou<rlit  and  lantxuaixe. 

Nor  should  Ave  overlook  the  fact  that  almost  all  wo  know  of  the 
history  of  the  Jewish  people  is  embodied  in  the  Bible.     The  apoc- 
ryphal books  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the  works  of  Josephus  are 
the  principal  outside  sources.     These  different  books  may,  then,  be 
*  Hermeneutics  of  the  New  Testament,  p.  159.  ^  Hermeneutics,  p.  251. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  223 

fairly  expected  to  interpret  themselves.  Their  spirit  and  purpose 
their  modes  of  thought  and  expression,  their  doctrinal  teachings 
and,  to  some  extent,  their  general  subject-matter,  would  be  natu- 
rally expected  to  have  a  self -conformity.  When,  upon  examina- 
tion, we  find  that  this  is  the  case,  we  shall  the  more  fully  apiire- 
ciate  the  importance  of  comparing  all  parallel  portions  and  readino- 
them  in  each  other's  light. 

Parallel  passages  have  been  commonly  divided  into  two  classes, 
verbal  and  real,  according  as  that  which  constitutes  the   „     „  , 

.  .  '^  in-iiuco  iiic    Parallels  verbal 

parallel  consists  m  words  or  in  like  subject-matter,  and  real. 
Where  the  same  word  occurs  in  similar  connexion,  or  in  reference 
to  the  same  general  subject,  the  parallel  is  called  verbal.  The  use 
of  such  parallel  passages  has  been  shown  above  in  determining  the 
meaning  of  words.^  Real  parallels  are  those  similar  passages  in 
which  the  likeness  or  identity  consists,  not  in  words  or  phrases,  but 
in  facts,  subjects,  sentiments,  or  doctrines.  Parallels  of  this  kind 
are  sometimes  subdivided  into  historic  and  didactic,  according  as 
the  subject-matter  consists  of  historical  events  or  matters  of  doc- 
trine. But  all  these  divisions  are,  perhaps,  needless  refinements. 
The  careful  expositor  will  consult  all  parallel  passages,  whether 
they  be  verbal,  historical,  or  doctrinal;  but  in  actual  interpretation 
he  will  find  little  occasion  to  discriminate  formally  between  these 
different  classes. 

The  great  thing  to  determine,  in  every  case,  is  whether  the  pas- 
sages adduced  are  really  parallel.     A  verbal   parallel  „     „  , 

^'  .  Parallels  must 

may  be  as  real  as  one  that  embodies  many  correspond-  bave  a  real  cor- 
ing sentiments,  for  a  single  word  is  often  decisive  of  a  ''e^P'^"''*^'^*^^- 
doctrine  or  a  fact.  On  the  other  hand,  there  may  be  a  likeness  of 
sentiment  without  any  real  parallelism.  Proverbs  xxii,  2,  and 
xxix,  13,  are  usually  taken  as  parallels,  but  a  close  inspection  will 
show  that  though  there  is  a  marked  similarity  of  sentiment,  there 
is  no  essential  identity  or  real  parallelism.  The  first  passage  is: 
"Rich  and  poor  meet  together;  maker  of  all  of  them  is  Jehovah." 
We  need  not  assume  that  this  meeting  together  is  in  the  grave  (Co- 
nant)  or  in  the  conflicts  (^traCJ)  of  life  in  a  hostile  sense.  The  sec- 
ond passage,  properly  rendered,  is:  "The  poor  and  the  man  of 
oppressions  meet  together;  an  enlightener  of  the  eyes  of  both  of 
them  is  Jehovah."  Here  the  mon  of  oppressioris  is  not  necessarily 
a  rich  man;  nor  is  enlightener  of  the  eyes  an  equivalent  of  maimer  in 
xxii,  2.  Hence,  all  that  can  be  properly  said  of  these  two  passages 
is,  that  they  are  similar  in  sentiment,  but  not  strictly  parallel  or 
identical  in  sense. 

'See  above,  pages  186,  ISY. 


224  PRINCIPLES    OF 

A  careful  comparison  of  the  parables  of  the  talents  (Matt,  xxv, 
ii-30)  and  of  the  pounds  (Luke  xix,  11-27)  "will  show  that  they 
liave  much  in  common,  together  with  not  a  fcAv  things  that  are  dif- 
ferent. They  were  spoken  at  different  times,  in  different  places, 
and  to  different  hearers.  The  parable  of  the  talents  deals  only 
with  the  servants  of  the  lord  who  went  into  a  far  country;  that  of 
the  pounds  deals  also  with  his  citizens  and  enemies  Avho  would  not 
have  him  reign  over  them.  Yet  the  great  lesson  of  the  necessity 
of  diligent  activity  for  the  Lord  in  his  absence  is  the  same  in  both 
]>arables. 

A  comparison  of  parallel  passages  is  necessary  in  order  to  deter- 
The  word  hate  mine  tlie  sense  of  the  word  hate  in  Luke  xiv,  26 :  "  If 
jiiustrated    hy   ^  comes  uuto  me,  and  hates  not  his  father,  and 

parallel      pas-         J  _  '   _  '      _ 

sages.  mother,  and  wife,  and  children,  and  brothers,  and  sis- 

ters, and  even  his  own  life  besides,  he  cannot  be  my  disciple."  This 
statement  appears  at  first  to  contravene  the  fifth  commandment  of 
the  decalogue,  and  also  to  involve  other  unreasonable  demands.  It 
seems  to  stand  opposed  to  the  Gospel  doctrine  of  love.  But,  turn- 
ing to  Matt.  X,  37,  we  find  the  statement  in  a  milder  form,  and 
woven  in  a  context  which  serves  to  disclose  its  full  force  and  bear- 
ing. Tliere  the  statement  is:  "He  that  loveth  father  or  mother 
more  than  me  is  not  worthy  of  me ;  and  he  that  loveth  son  or  daugh- 
ter more  than  me  is  not  worthy  of  me."  The  immediate  context 
of  this  verse  (verses  34-39),  a  characteristic  passage  of  our  Lord's 
more  ardent  utterances,  sets  its  meaning  in  a  clear  light.  "  Do  not 
^  think,"  he  says,  verse  34,  "that  I  came  to  send  peace 
'on  the  earth;  I  came  not  to  send  peace  but  a  sword." 
He  sees  a  world  lying  in  wickedness,  and  exhibiting  all  forms  of 
opposition  to  his  messages  of  truth.  With  such  a  world  he  can 
make  no  compromise,  and  have  no  peace  without,  first,  a  bitter 
conflict.  Such  conflict  he,  therefore,  purposely  invites.  He  will 
conquer  a  peace,  or  else  have  none  at  all.  "  Tlie  telic  style  of  ex- 
pression is  not  only  rhetorical,  indicating  that  the  result  is  unavoid-  • 
able,  but  what  Jesus  expresses  is  a  purpose — not  the  final  design  of 
his  coming,  but  an  intermediate  purpose — in  seeing  clearly  pre- 
sented to  his  view  the  reciprocally  hostile  excitement  as  a  necessary 
transition,  Avhich  he  therefore,  in  keeping  Avith  his  destiny  as 
Messiah,  must  be  sent  first  of  all  to  bring  forth."  '  Before  his 
final  purpose  is  accomplished  he  sees  what  bitter  strifes  must  come; 
but  the  grand  result  will  be  well  worth  all  the  intermediate  woes. 
Therefore  he  will  call  father,  mother,  child,  although  it  cause  many 
household  divisions;  aiul  so  he  adds,  as  explaining  how  he  Avill  send 
'  Meyer,  Critieal  and  Exegctical  Commentary,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  225 

a  sword  rather  than  peace :  "  For  I  came  to  set  a  man  at  variance 
against  his  father,  and  the  daughter  against  her  mother,  and  the' 
daughter-in-law  against  her  mother-in-law ;  and  a  man's  foes  shall 
be  they  of  his  own  household."  When  this  state  of  things  shall 
come  to  pass,  how  many  will  be  called  upon  to  decide  whether  they 
will  cleave  to  Christ,  or  to  an  unchristian  father?  Micah's  words 
(vii,  6)  will  then  be  true.  Son  will  oppose  father,  daughter  will 
rise  up  against  mother,  and  if  one  remains  true  to  the  Lord  Christ, 
lie  Avill  have  to  forsake  his  own  household  and  kin.  He  cannot  be 
a  true  disciple  and  love  his  parents  or  children  more  than  Christ. 
Hence  he  must  needs  set  them  aside,  forsake  them,  love  them  less, 
and  even  oppose  them,  assuming  toward  them  the  hostile  attitude 
of  an  enemy  for  Christ's  sake.  The  import  of  hate,  in  Luke  xiv,  26, 
is  accordingly  made  clear. 

This  peculiar  meaning  of  the  word  is  further  confirmed  by  its  use 
in  Matt,  vi,  24 :  "  No  man  can  serve  two  masters :  for 
either  he  will  hate  the  one,  and  love  the  other ;  or  else 
he  will  hold  to  the  one,  and  des2:)ise  the  other.  Ye  cannot  serve  God 
and  Mammon."  Two  masters,  so  opposite  in  nature  as  God  and 
Mammon,  cannot  be  loved  and  seiwed  at  one  and  the  same  time.  The 
love  of  the  one  necessarily  excludes  the  love  of  the  other,  and  nei- 
ther will  be  served  with  a  divided  heart.  In  the  case  of  such  essen- 
tial opposites,  a  lack  of  love  for  one  amounts  to  a  disloyal  enmitj' — 
the  root  of  all  hatred.  Another  parallel,  illustrative  of  this  impres- 
sive teaching,  is  to  be  found  in  Deut.  xiii,  6-11,  where  it  is  enjoined 
that,  if  brother,  son,  daughter,  wife,  or  friend  entice  one  to  idolatry, 
he  shall  not  only  not  consent,  but  he  shall  not  have  pity  on  the 
seducer,  and  shall  take  measures  to  have  him  publicly  punished  as 
an  enemy  of  God  and  his  people.  Hence  we  derive  the  lesson  that 
one  who  opposes  our  love  and  loyalty  to  God  or  Christ  is  the  worst 
possible  enemy.  Compare  also  John  xii,  25;  Rom.  ix,  13;  Mai. 
i,  2,  3;  Deut.  xxi,  15. 

The  true  interpretation  of  Jesus'  words  to  Peter,  in  Matt,  xvi,  18, 
will  be  fully  apprehended  only  by  a  comparison  and  careful  study 
of  all  the  parallel  texts.  Jesus  says  to  Peter,  "Thou  ^^^^^  ^  jj^.^^ 
art  Peter  (Trt'rpof),  and  upon  this  petra  (or  rock,  ettl  stone.  Matt. xvi, 
ravTij  TTj  Trerpa),  will  I  build  my  Church,  and  the 
gates  of  Hades  shall  not  prevail  against  her."  Hoav  is  it  possible 
from  this  passage  alone  to  decide  whether  the  rock  (nerQa)  refers 
to  Christ  (as  Augustine  and  Wordsworth),  or  to  Peter's  confession 
(Luther  and  many  Protestant  divines),  or  to  Peter  himself?  It  is 
noticeable  that  in  the  parallel  passages  of  Mark  (viii,  27-30)  and 
Luke  (ix,  18-21)  these  words  of  Christ  to  Peter  do  not  occur.  The 
15 


326  PRINCIPLES   OF 

immediate  context  presents  us  with  Simon  Peter,  as  the  spokesman 
and  representative  of  the  disciijles,  answering  Jesus'  question  with 
the  bold  and  confident  confession,  "  Tliou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of 
the  living  God."  Jesus  was  evidently  moved  by  the  fervid  words 
of  Peter,  and  said  to  him,  "  Blessed  art  thou,  Simon  Bar-jona,  for 
flesh  and  blood  revealed  it  not  to  thee,  but  my  Father  Avho  is  in  the 
heavens."  Whatever  knowledge  and  convictions  of  Jesus'  messiah- 
ship  and  divinity  the  disciples  had  attained  before,  this  noble  con- 
fession of  Peter  possessed  the  newness  and  glory  of  a  special  revela- 
tion. It  was  not  the  offspring  of  "flesh  and  blood,"  that  is,  not  of 
natural  human  birth  or  origin,  but  the  S])ontancous  outburst  of  a 
divine  inspiration  from  heaven.  Peter  was  for  the  moment  caught 
up  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  and,  in  the  glowing  fervour  of  such  in- 
spiration, spoke  the  very  word  of  the  Father.  He  was  accordingly 
pronounced  the  blessed  {^aKd^iog)  or  happy  one. 

Turning  now  to  the  narrative  of  Simon's  introduction  to  the 
John  1,41-13  Saviour  (John  i,  41-43),  we  compare  the  first  mention 
compared.  of  the  name  Peter.  He  was  led  into  the  presence  of 
Jesus  by  his  own  brother  Andrew,  and  Jesus,  gazing  on  him,  said, 
"  Thou  art  Simon,  the  son  of  Jonah ;  thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas, 
which  is  interpreted  Peter"  (Trerpof).  Thus,  at  the  beginning,  he 
tells  him  what  he  is  and  what  he  shall  he.  A  doubtful  character  at 
that  time  was  Simon,  the  son  of  Jonah;  irritable,  impetuous,  un- 
stable, irresolute;  but  Jesus  saw  a  coming  hour  when  he  would  be- 
come the  bold,  strong,  abiding,  memorable  stone  (Peter),  the  typ- 
ical and  representative  confessor  of  the  Christ.  Reverting  again 
to  the  passage  in  Matthew,  it  is  easy  to  see  that,  through  his  in- 
spired confession  of  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  Simon 
has  attained  the  ideal  foreseen  and  foretold  by  his  Lord.  He  has 
now  become  Peter  indeed ;  now  "  thou  art  Peter,"  not  "  shalt  be 
called  Peter."  Accordingly,  we  cannot  avoid  the  conviction  that 
the  manifest  play  on  the  words  ^>e^/-os  and  petra  (in  Matt,  xvi,  18.) 
has  a  designed  and  important  significance,  and  also  an  allusion  to 
the  first  bestowal  of  the  name  on  Simon  (John  i,  43) ;  as  if  the  Lord 
had  said :  Remember,  Simon,  the  significant  name  I  gave  thee  at 
our  first  meeting.  Then  I  said.  Thou  shalt  be  called  Peter;  now 
I  say  unto  thee.  Thou  art  Peter. 

But  there  is  doubtless  a  designed  significance  in  the  change  from 
Petros  and  petros  to  petra,  in  Matt,  xvi,  1 8.  It  is  altogether  prob- 
petra.  ^1,1^    tXxat    there    was    a    corresponding    change    in    llie 

Aramaic  words  used  by  our  Lord  on  this  occasion.  He  may,  per- 
haps, have  said:  "Thou  art  Keph  (f)'?  or  riS"'3),  and  upon  tliis 
kepha  (t^D'S)  I  will  build  my  Church."     What,  then,  is  meant  by 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  227 

the  neTQa,  ^^c^ra,  on  which  Christ  huilds  his  Church?  In  answer- 
ing this  question  we  inquire  what  other  scriptures  say  about  the 
buihling  of  the  Church,  and  in  Eph.  ii,  20-22  we  find  it  written 
that  Cliristian  believers  constitute  "  the  household  of  Ephesians  ii 
God,  having  been  built  upon  the  foundation  of  the  20-23  compared. 
apostles  and  prophets,  Christ  Jesus  himself  being  the  chief  corner- 
stone ;  in  whom  all  the  building,  fitly  framed  together,  grows  unto 
a  holy  temple  in  the  Lord ;  in  whom  ye  also  are  builded  together 
for  a  habitation  of  God  in  the  Spirit."  Having  made  the  natural 
and  easy  transition  from  the  figure  of  a  household  to  that  of  the 
structure  in  Avhich  the  household  dwells,  the  apostle  speaks  of  the 
latter  as  "built  upon  the  foundation  of  the  apostles  and  prophets." 
The  prophets  here  intended  are  doubtless  the  New  Testament 
prophets  referred  to  in  chapters  iii,  5  and  iv,  ]  1. 

The  foundation  of  the  apostles  and  proj^heis  has  been  explained 
(1)  as  a  genitive  of  apposition — the  foundation  which  ^      ,  .. 

)   '  .  ®  ^^  Foundation  of 

is  constituted  of  apostles  and  prophets;  that  is,  the  the  apostles 
apostles  and  prophets  are  themselves  the.  foundation  ^°^  prophets. 
(so  Chrysostom,  Olshausen,  De  Wette,  and  many  others) ;  (2)  as  a 
genitive  of  the  originating  cause — the  foundation  laid  by  the 
apostles  (Calvin,  Koppe,  Harless,  Meyer,  Eadie,  Ellicott) ;  (3)  as  a 
genitive  of  possession — the  apostles  and  prophets'  foundation,  that 
is,  the  foundation  upon  which  they  as  well  as  all  other  believers  are 
builded  (Beza,  Bucer,  Alford).  We  believe  that  in  the  breadth 
and  fulness  of  the  apostle's  conception,  there  is  room  for  all  these 
thoughts,  and  a  wnder  comparison  of  Scripture  corroborates  this 
view.  In  Gal,  ii,  9,  James,  Cephas,  and  John  are  spoken  of  as 
pillars  {gtvXqi),  foundation-pillars,  or  columnar  supports  of  the 
Church.  In  the  apocalyptic  vision  of  the  New  Jerusalem,  which  is 
"the  bride,  the  wife  of  the  Lamb"  (Rev.  xxi,  9),  it  is  said  that 
"  the  wall  of  the  city  has  twelve  foundations,  and  upon 
them  twelve  names  of  the  twelve  apostles  of  the  Lamb" 
(Rev.  xxi,  14).  Here  it  is  evident  that  the  apostles  are  conceived 
as  foundation-stones,  forming  the  substructure  of  the  Church;  and 
with  this  conception  "the  foundation  of  the  apostles  and  prophets" 
(Eph.  ii,  20)  may  be  taken  as  genitive  of  apposition.  But  in  1  Cor. 
iii,  10,  the  apostle  speaks  of  himself  as  a  wise  architect, 
laying  a  foundation  {pe\iiXiov  edrjKa,  a  foundation  I 
laid).  Immediately  after  (verse  11)  he  says:  "Other  foundation 
can  no  one  lay  than  that  which  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ."  This 
foundation  Paid  himself  laid  when  he  founded  the  Church  of  Cor- 
inth, and  first  made  kno^vn  there  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Having 
once  laid  this  foundation,  no  man  could  lay  another,  although  he 


228  PRINCIPLES   OF 

might  build  thereupon.  Paul  himself  could  not  have  laid  another 
had  some  one  else  been  first  to  lay  this  foundation  in  Corinth 
(compare  Rom.  xv,  20).  How  he  laid  this  foundation  he  tells  in 
chap,  ii,  1-5,  especially  when  he  says  (verse  2)  "I  determined  not 
to  know  any  thing  among  you  except  Jesus  Christ,  and  him  cruci- 
fied." So  then,  in  this  sense,  Ejjhesians  ii,  20  may  be  taken  as  gen- 
itive of  the  originating  cause — the  foundation  which  the  apostles 
laid.  At  the  same  time  we  need  not  overlook  or  ignore  the  fact 
presented  in  1  Cor.  iii,  11,  that  Jesus  is  himself  the  foundation,  that 
is,  Jesus  Christ — including  his  person,  work,  and  doctrine — is  the 
great  fact  on  which  the  Church  is  builded,  and  without  which  there 
could  be  no  redemption.  Hence  the  Church  itself,  according  to 
1  Tim.  iii,  15,  is  the  "pillar  and  basis  (etfpa/wfia)  of  the  truth." 
Accordingly  we  hold  that  the  expression  "  foundation  of  the  apostles 
and  prophets"  (Eph.  ii,  20)  has  a  fulness  of  meaning  which  may  in- 
clude all  these  thoughts.  The  apostles  were  themselves  incorj:>or- 
ated  in  this  foundation,  and  made  pillars  or  foundation  stones; 
they,  too,  were  instrumental  in  laying  this  foundation  and  building 
upon  it ;  and  having  laid  it  in  Christ,  and  woi'king  solely  tlirough 
Christ,  without  whom  they  could  do  nothing,  Jesus  Christ  himself, 
as  preached  by  them,  Avas  also  conceived  as  the  underlying  basis 
and  foundation  of  all  (1  Cor.  iii,  11). 

Another  Scripture,  in  1  Peter  ii,  4,  5,  should  also  be  collated 
1  Peter  ii,  4, 5,  here,  for  it  was  written  by  the  apostle  to  whom  the 
compared.  words  of  Matt,  xvi,  18,  were  addressed,  and  seems  to 
have  been  with  him  a  thought  that  lingered  like  a  i:)recious  mem- 
ory in  the  soul:  "To  whom  (i.  e.,  the  gracious  Lord  just  mentioned) 
approaching,  a  living  stone,  by  men  indeed  disallowed,  but  before 
God  chosen,  precious,  do  ye  also  yourselves,  as  living  stones,  be 
built  up  a  spiritual  house."  Here  the  Lord  is  himself  presented  as 
the  elect  and  precious  corner-stone  (comp.  verse  6),  and  at  the  same 
time  Christian  believers  are  also  represented  as  living  stones,  built 
into  the  same  spiritual  temple. 

Coming  back  now  to  the  text  in  Matt,  xvi,  18,  which  Schaff  pro- 
nounces "  one  of  the  prof oundest  and  most  far-reaching  prophetical, 
but,  at  the  same  time,  one  of  the  most  controverted,  sayings  of  the 
Saviour,"  '  we  are  furnished,  by  the  above  collation  of  cognate  Scrip- 
tures, with  the  means  of  apprehending  its  true  impoi't  and  signifi- 
cance. Filled  with  a  divine  inspiration,  Peter  confessed  his  Lord 
Christ,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father  (compare  1  John  iv,  15,  and 
Rom.   x,  9),  and  in  that  blessed  attainment  and  confession  he  be- 

'  Lange's  Commentary  on  Matthew,  translated  and  annotated  by  Phillip  Schaff, 
p.  293.     New  York,  1864.     Compare  also  Meyer,  Alford,  and  Nast,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  229 

came  the  representative  or  ideal  Christian  confessor.  In  view  of 
this,  Jesus  says  to  him:  Now  thou  art  Peter;  thou  art  become  a 
living  stone,  the  type  and  representative  of  the  multitude  of  livins^ 
stones  upon  which  I  will  build  my  Church.  The  change  from  the 
masculine  nergGg  to  the  feminine  nerpa  fittingly  indicates  that  it  is 
not  so  much  on  Peter,  the  man,  the  single  and  separate  individual, 
as  on  Peter  considered  as  the  confessor,  the  type  and  representa- 
tive of  all  other  Christian  confessors,  who  are  to  be  "  builded  to- 
gether for  a  habitation  of  God  in  the  Spirit "  (Eph.  ii,  22). 

In  the  light  of  all  these  Scriptures  we  may  see  the  impropriety 
and  irrelevancy  of  what  has  been  the  prevailing  Prot-  Error  of  the 
estant  interpretation,  namely,  making  the  nerpa,  rock,  coinmon  prot- 
to  be  Peter's  confession.  "  Every  building,"  says  Nast,  pretation  of 
"must  have  foundation  stones.  What  is  the  founda-  ^^'^P°- 
tion  of  the  Christian  Church  on  the  part  of  man  ?  Is  it  not — what 
Peter  exhibited — a  faith  wrought  in  the  heart  by  the  Holy  Ghost, 
and  a  confession  with  the  mouth  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son 
of  the  living  God  ?  But  this  believing  with  the  heart  and  confess- 
ing with  the  mouth  is  something  pei'sonal;  it  cannot  be  separated 
from  the  living  personality  that  believes  and  confesses.  The 
Church  consists  of  living  men,  and  its  foundation  cannot  be  a  mere 
abstract  truth  or  doctrine  apart  from  the  living  personality  in 
which  it  is  embodied.  This  is  in  accordance  with  the  whole  New 
Testament  language,  in  which  not  doctrines  or  confessions,  but 
men,  are  uniformly  called  pillars  or  foundations  of  the  spiritual 
building."  ' 

It  is  well  known  how  large  a  portion  of  the  three  synoptic  Gos- 
pels   consists    of   parallel   narratives   of   the  words  and   works   cf 

'  Commentary  on  the  Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark,  in  loco.  To  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic interpretation,  which  explains  these  words  as  investing  Peter  and  his  successors 
with  a  permanent  primacy  at  Rome,  Schaff  opposes  the  following  insuperable  objec- 
tions :  (1)  It  obliterates  the  distinction  lietv/een  petros  and  jxtra  ;  Q2)  it  is  inconsistent 
with  the  true  nature  of  the  architectural  figure :  the  foundation  of  a  building  is  one 
and  abiding,  and  not  constantly  renev/ed  and  changed ;  (3)  it  confounds  priority  of 
time  with  permanent  superiority  of  rank  ;  (4 )  it  confounds  the  apostolate,  which,  strict- 
ly speaking,  is  not  transferable,  but  confined  to  the  original  personal  disciples  of 
Christ  and  inspired  organs  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  with  the  post-apostolic  episcopate ;  (5)  it 
involves  an  injustice  to  the  other  apostles,  who,  as  a  body,  are  expressly  called  the 
foundation  or  foundation-stones  of  the  Church ;  (6)  it  contradicts  the  whole  spirit  of 
Peter's  epistles,  which  is  strongly  antihierarchical,  and  disclaims  any  superiority  over 
his  '  fellow-presbyters ; '  (7)  finally,  it  rests  on  gratuitous  assumjitions  which  can 
never  be  proven  either  exegetically  or  historically,  viz.,  the  transferability  of  Peter's 
primacy,  and  its  actual  transfer  upon  the  bishop,  not  of  Jerusalem,  nor  of  Antioch 
(where  Peter  certainly  was),  but  of  Rome  exclusively."  See  Lange's  Matthev,-,  in 
loco,  page  297. 


230  PRINCIPLES   OF 

Jesus.     St.  Paul's  account  of  the  appearances  of  Jesus  after  the 
resurrection  (xv,  4-V),  and  of   the   institution  of   the 

Large  portions  ^  ,    .  .  ,,  i  <■ 

of  scripture  Lord's  Supper  (xi,  23-26),  are  well  worthy  of  comparison 
parauei.  ^^,-^|^  ^^le  several  Gospel  narratives.'   The  Epistles  of  Paul 

to  the  Romans  and  to  the  Galatians,  being  each  so  largely  devoted 
to  the  doctrine  of  righteousness  through  faith,  should  be  studied 
together,  for  they  have  many  parallels  which  help  to  illustrate  each 
other.  Not  a  few  parallel  passages  of  the  Ephesian  and  Colossian 
Epistles  throw  light  upon  each  other.  The  second  and  third  chap- 
ters of  2  Peter  should  be  studied  and  expounded  in  connexion 
with  the  Epistle  of  Jude.  The  genealogies  of  Genesis,  Chronicles, 
and  Matthew  and  Luke,  should  be  compared,  as  also  large  sections 
of  the  books  of  Samuel,  Kings,  Chronicles,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah. 
We  have  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  three  separate  accounts  of 
Paul's  conversion  (chaps,  ix,  xxii,  and  xxvi),  and  all  these  illustrate 
and  supplement  each  other.  The  many  passages  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment which  are  quoted  or  referred  to  in  the  New,  are  also  parallels; 
but  they  are  so  specific  in  their  nature  as  to  call  for  special  treat- 
ment in  a  future  chapter. 

'  More  than  common  discretion  must  be  exercised  by  the  interpreter  of  the  New 
Testament  with  regard  to  the  parallel  passages  in  the  Gospels,  particularly  in  the 
synoptical  Gospels.  With  respect  to  the  latter  chiefly,  they  often  relate  the  same 
thing,  sometimes  they  communicate  the  same  conversation  or  saying  of  Jesus,  but  not 
in  the  same  words.  We  have  here,  then,  different  accounts  of  the  same  occurrence 
or  tiling.  But  now  the  interpreter  has  no  right  to  conclude  from  one  evangelist  to 
anotlier  without  any  limitation,  and  e.  g.  to  explain  and  supplement  the  words  of  the 
Saviour,  as  recorded  by  one  narrator,  out  of  the  account  of  another.  For,  in  any 
ditierence  in  the  accounts,  the  question  is,  ivhat  Jesus  actually  said.  We  must  com- 
mence there,  by  making  a  distinction  between  what  was  actually  said  and  what  is 
communicated  concerning  it ;  and  with  this  last  the  interpreter  has  to  deal.  For  in- 
stance, according  to  Matt,  vi,  11,  Jesus  taught  them  to  pray  in  the  "Lord's  Prayer:" 
(Jive  us  "  this  day  "  our  daily  bread ;  according  to  Luke  xi,  3 :  Give  us  "day  by  day," 
etc.  Now  we  have  no  right  to  say :  therefore,  this  day  =  day  by  day.  In  the  same 
prayer  Matthew  has  it :  "  as  we  forgive,"  etc.  (thus,  standard) ;  Luke :  "  for  wo  also 
forgive,"  etc.  (thus,  reason  for  hearing  the  prayer).  Now  we  may  not  say  that  the 
one  is  equal  to  the  other.  In  like  manner,  also,  we  may  not  explain  1  Cor.  xiv  and 
Acts  ii,  4-13  out  of  each  other,  and  so  confound  them  with  each  other.  In  the  latter 
passage  there  is  indeed  mention  of  other  (strange)  languages  {Irepai  yAuaaaC),  in  the 
former,  on  the  contrary,  not  a  word  is  .^aid  of  "  other "  languages,  but  of  tongues 
{y'/.uaaat) ;  and  in  Acts  ii  the  context  of  the  narrative  compels  us  quite  as  nuich 
to  think  of  strange  languages,  as  the  context  in  1  Cor.  xiv  decidedly  forbids  it. — 
Uoedes,  Manual  of  Ilermeueutics,  pp.  100,  lOL 


BIBLICAL    ilERMENEUTICS.  231 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE    HISTORICAL    STANDPOINT. 

It  is  of  the  first  importance,  in  interpreting  a  written  document,  to 
ascertain  who  the  author  was,  and  to  determine  the   ,      ^    „„  „, 

iniport&DCG   or 

time,  the  place,  and  the  circumstances  of  his  writing,  the  historical 
The  interpreter  should,  therefore,  endeavour  to  take  ^  ^^  ^°"^ ' 
himself  from  the  present,  and  to  transport  himself  into  the  his- 
torical position  of  his  author,  look  through  his  eyes,  note  his  sur- 
roundings, feel  with  his  heart,  and  catch  his  emotion.  Herein  we 
note  the  import  of  the  term  gravauiatico-historical  interpretation. 
We  are  not  only  to  grasp  the  grammatical  import  of  words  and 
sentences,  but  also  to  feel  the  force  and  bearing  of  the  historical 
circumstances  which  may  in  any  way  have  affected  the  writer. 
Hence,  too,  it  will  be  seen  how  intimately  connected  may  be  the 
object  or  design  of  a  writing  and  the  occasion  which  prompted  its 
composition.  The  individuality  of  the  writer,  his  local  surround- 
inirs,  his  wants  and  desires,  his  relation  to  those  for  whom  he 
wrote,  his  nationality  and  theirs,  the  character  of  the  times  when 
he  wrote — all  these  matters  are  of  the  first  importance  to  a  thor- 
ough interpretation  of  the  several  books  of  Scripture. 

A  knowledge  of  geography,  history,  chronology,  and  antiquities, 
has  already  been  mentioned  as  an  essential  qualification   j-^^g^gj^g  j^jg. 
of  the  biblical  interpreter.^     Especially  should  he  have   toricai  unowi-     i 
a  clear  conception   of  the   order  of  events  connected  'r  genecessary.  y 
with  the  whole  course  of  sacred  history,  such  as  the  contempora-, 
neous  history,  so  far  as  it  may  be  known,  of  the  great  nations  and 
tribes  of  patriarchal  times;  the  great  world-powers  of  Egypt,  As- 
syria, Babylon,  and  Persia,   with  which  the  Israelites  at  various 
times   came  in  contact  ;    the  Macedonian  Empire,   with  its  later 
Ptolemaic  and  Seleucidaie  branches,  from  which  the  Jewish  people 
suffered  many  woes,  and  the  subsequent  conquest  and  dominion  of 
the  Romans.     The  exegete  should  be  able  to  take  his  standpoint    , 
anywhere  along  this  line  of  history  wherever  he  may  find  the  age    • 
of  his  author,  and  thence  vividly  grasp  the  outlying  circumstances. 
He  should  seek  a  familiarity  with  the  customs,  life,  spirit,  ideas, 
and   pursuits    of    these  different    times   and  different    tribes    and 

'  See  above,  pp.  154,  156. 


232  PRINCIPLES   OF 

nations,  so  as  to  distinguish  readily  Avliat  belonged  to  one  and  what 
to  another.  By  such  knowledge  he  will  be  able  not  only  to  transport 
himself  into  any  given  age,  but  also  to  avoid  confounding  the  ideas 
of  one  age  or  race  with  those  of  another. 

It  is  not  an  easy  task  for  one  to  disengage  himself  from  the  liv- 
To  transfer  one-  ing  present,  and  thus  transport  himself  into  a  past  age. 
lo'^he^'remote  "^^  ^®  advance  in  general  knowledge,  and  attain  a 
past  not  eiisy.  higher  civilization,  we  unconsciously  grow  out  of  old 
habits  and  ideas.  We  lose  the  spirit  of  the  olden  times,  and  be- 
come filled  with  the  broader  generalization  and  more  scientific  pro- 
cedures of  modern  thought.  The  immensity  of  the  universe,  the 
vast  accumulations  of  human  study  and  research,  the  influence  of 
great  civil  and  ecclesiastical  institutions,  and  the  power  of  tradi- 
tional sentiment  and  opinions,  govern  and  shape  our  modes  of 
thought  to  an  extent  we  hardly  know.  To  tear  oneself  away  from 
these,  and  go  back  in  spirit  to  the  age  of  Moses,  or  David,  or 
Isaiah,  or  Ezra,  or  of  Matthew  and  Paul,  and  assume  the  historic 
standpoint  of  any  of  those  writers,  so  as  to  see  and  feel  as  they 
did — this  surely  is  no  easy  task.  Yet,  if  we  truly  catch  the  spirit 
and  feel  the  living  force  of  the  ancient  oracles  of  God,  we  need  to 
apprehend  them  somewhat  as  they  first  thrilled  the  hearts  of  those 
for  whom  they  wei'e  immediately  given. 

Not  a  few  devout  readers  of  the  Bible  are  so  impressed  with  ex- 
Undue  exaita-  alted  ideas  of  the  glory  and  sanctity  of  the  ancient 
saintf  to^"*be  Worthies,  that  Jiey  are  liable  to  take  the  record  of  their 
avoided.  lives  in  an  unnatural  light.     To  some  it  is  difficult  to 

believe  that  Moses  and  Paul  were  not  acquainted  with  the  events 
of  modern  times.  The  wisdom  of  Solomon,  they  imagine,  must 
have  comprehended  all  that  man  can  know.  Isaiah  and  Daniel 
must  have  discerned  all  future  events  as  clearly  as  if  they  had 
already  occurred.  The  writers  of  the  New  Testament  must  have 
known  Avhat  a  history  and  an  influence  their  lifework  would  jjossess 
in  after  ages.  To  such  minds  the  names  of  Abraham,  Jacob, 
Joshua,  Jephthah,  and  Samson,  are  so  associated  with  holy 
thoughts  and  supernatural  revelations  that  they  half  forget  that 
they  were  men  of  like  passions  with  ourselves.  Such  an  undue 
exaltation  of  the  sanctity  of  the  biblical  saints  Avill  be  likely  to 
interfere  with  a  true  historical  exposition.  The  divine  call  and 
inspiration  of  prophets  and  apostles  did  not  nullify  or  set  aside 
their  natural  human  powers,  and  the  biblical  interpreter  should  not 
allow  his  vision  to  be  so  dazzled  by  the  glory  of  their  divine  mis- 
sion as  to  make  him  blind  to  facts  of  their  history.  Abraham's 
cunning  and  deceit,  conspicuous  also   in  Isaac  and  Jacob,  Moses' 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  233 

hasty  passions,  and  the  barbarous  brutality  of  most  of  the  judges 
and  kings  of  Israel,  are  not  to  be  explained  away.  They  are  facts 
which  the  interpreter  must  fully  recognize;  and  the  more  fully  and 
vividly  ail  such  facts  are  realized  and  set  in  their  true  lig-ht  and 
bearing,  the  more  accurately  shall  we  apprehend  the  real  impoit  of 
the  Scriptures. 

In  the  exposition  oLih£L£salms.„imfi_of  the  first. iIujj£:a.lQii]Lq-uire^-. 
after  is  the  personal  standpoint  of  the  author.     "  The   „. ,    .    , 

_t^   J.. ■^" ^       ,.,. —  Historical    oc- 

historicaToccasions  of  the  Psalms,"  says  HiBbard,  "  have  casions  of  the 
ever  been  regarded,  by  judicious  commentators,  as  im-  ^^  "^^' 
portant  aids  to  their  interpretation,  and  the  full  exhibition  of  their 
beauty  and  power.  In  the  explanation  of  a  work  on  exact  science, 
or  of  a  metaphysical  essay,  no  importance  is  attached  to  the  exter- 
nal circumstances  and  place  of  the  author  at  the  time  of  writing. 
In  such  a  case  the  work  has  no  relation  to  passing  events,  but  to 
the  abstract  and  essential  relations  of  things.  Very  different  is^  the 
language  of  poetry,  and  indeed  of  almost  all  such  books  as  the  sa- 
cred Scriptures  are,  which  were  at  first  addressed  to  a  particular 
peof)le,  or  to  particular  individuals,  for  their  moral  benefit,  and 
much  of  them  occupied  with  the  personal  experiences  of  their 
authors.  Here  occasion,  contact  with  outward  things,  the  influence 
of  external  circumstances  and  of  passing  events,  play  a  conspicu- 
ous part  iu  giving  mould  and  fashion  to  the  thoughts  and  feelings 
of  the  writer,  scope  and  design  to  his  subject,  and  meaning  rnd 
pertinency  to  his  words.  It  may  be  said  of  the  Hebrew  poets,  as 
of  those  of  all  other  nations,  that  the  interpretation  of  their  poetry 
is  less  dependent  on  verbal  criticism  than  on  sympathy  with  the 
feelings  of  the  author,  knowledge  of  his  circumstances,  and  atten- 
tion to  the  scope  and  drift  of  his  utterances.  You  must  place 
yourself  in  his  condition,  adopt  his  sentiments,  and  be  floated  on- 
ward with  the  current  of  his  feelings,  soothed  by  his  consolations, 
or  agitated  by  the  storm  of  his  emotions."  * 

Of  many  of  the  Psalms  it  is  impossible  now  to  determine  the 
historical  standpoint;  but  not  a  few  of  them  are  so  clear  in  their 
allusions  as  to  leave  no  reasonable  doubt  as  to  the  occasion  on 
which  they  were  composed.  There  is,  for  example,  no  good  rea- 
son for  doubting  the  genuineness  of  the  inscription  to  the  third 
psalm,  Avhich  refers  the  composition  to  David  when  he  fled  from 
the  face  of  his  son  Absalom.  "  From  verse  5  we  gather,"  says 
Perowne,  "that  the  psalm  is  a  morning  hymn.  With  returning 
day  there  comes  back  on  the  monarch's  heart  the  recollection   of 

'  The  Psalms,  Chronologically  Arranged,  with  Historical  Introductions,  General  In- 
troduction, page  12.     New  York,  1856. 


vii 


234  PRINCIPLES   OF 

tlie  enemies  wlio  threaten  him — a  nation  up  in  arms  against  him, 
his  own  son  heading  the  rebellion,  his  wisest  and  most  trusted 
counsellor  in  the  ranks  of  his  foes  (2  Sam.  xv-xvii).  Never,  not 
even  when  hounded  by  Saul,  had  he  found  his  position  one  of 
greater  danger.  The  odds  were  overwhelmingly  against  him. 
This  is  a  fact  which  he  does  not  attempt  to  hide  from  himself: 
'How  mcmy  are  mine  enemies;'  'many  rise  up  against  me;'  '  many 
say  to  my  soul;'  'ten  tJioxisands  of  the  people  have  set  themselves 
against  me'  (verses  1,  2,  6).  Meanw^hile,  where  are  his  friends,  his 
army,  his  counsellors?  Not  a  word  of  allusion  to  any  of  them  in 
the  psalm.  Yet  he  is  not  crushed;  he  is  not  desponding.  Ene- 
mies may  be  thick  as  the  leaves  of  the  forest,  and  earthly  friends 
may  be  few,  or  uncertain,  or  far  off.  But  there  is  one  Friend  who 
cannot  fail  him,  and  to  him  David  turns  with  a  confidence  and 
affection  w^hich  lift  him  above  all  his  fears.  Never  had  he  been 
more  sensible  of  the  reality  and  preciousness  of  the  divine  protec- 
tion. If  he  was  surrounded  by  his  enemies,  Jehovah  was  his  shield. 
If  Shimei  and  his  crew  turned  his  glory  into  shame,  Jehovah  was 
his  glory.  If  they  sought  to  revile  and  degrade  him-,  Jehovah  was 
the  lifter-up  of  his  head.  Nor  did  the  mere  fact  of  distnnce  from 
Jerusalem  separate  between  him  and  his  God.  He  had  sent  back 
the  ark  and  the  priests,  for  he  would  not  endanger  their  safety,  and 
he  did  not  trust  in  them  as  a  charm,  and  he  knew  that  Jehovah 
could  still  hear  him  from  'his  holy  mountain'  (verse  4),  could  still 
lift  up  the  light  of  his  countenance  upon  him,  and  put  gladness  in 
his  heart  (Psa.  iv,  C,  V).  Sustained  by  Jehovah,  he  had  laid  him 
down  and  slept  in  safety;  trusting  in  the  same  mighty  protection 
he  would  lie  down  again  to  rest.  Enemies  might  taunt  him, 
(verse  2),  and  friends  might,  fail  him,  but  the  victory  was  Jeho- 
vah's, and  he  could  break  the  teeth  of  the  ungodly  "  (vii,  8).' 

Tlie  liistorical  standpoint  of  a  writer  is  so  often  intimately  cax\-\ 
conskiiT     the  nectcd  with  his  situation  at  the  date  of  writing,  that 

the'tiniVofthe  ^^^^  ^^^^  ^^"^^  '"^"^  ^^^^  \^^^^^  ^^  the  composition  should 
composition.  be  considei'cd  together.  The  locality  of  the  incidents 
recorded  should  also  be  closely  studied  and  pictured  before  the 
mind.  It  adds  much  to  one's  knowledge  and  appreciation  of  bib- 
lical history  to  visit  the  lands  trodden  by  patriarchs,  prophets,  and 
apostles.  Seeing  Palestine  is,  indeed,  a  fifth  gospel.  A  jiersonal 
visit  to  Beer-shel)a,  Hebron,  Jerusalem,  Joppa,  Nazareth,  and  the 
Sea  of  Galilee,  affords  a  realistic  sense  of  sacred  narratives  con- 
nected with  these  places  such  as  cannot  otherwise  be  had.     The 

'  The  Book  of  Psalms,  New  Translation,  with  Introductions  and  Notes.     Introduction 
to  Psalm  iii.     Andover,  1876. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  235 

decalogue  and  the  laws  of  Moses  become  more  awful  and  impres- 
sive when  read  upon  Mount  Sinai,  and  the  Lord's  figony  in  the 
garden  thrills  the  soul  with  deeper  emotion  when  meditated  in  the 
Kedron  valley,  beneath  the  old  trees  at  the  foot  of  the  Mount  of 
Olives. 

What  a  vividness  and  reality  appear  in  the  Epistles  of  Paul  when_ 

we  study  them  in  connexion  with  tlie  account  of   his 

.  -    1   1  T      1  1       •      1  Journeys    and 

apostolic  journeys  and  labours,  and  the  physical  and   Epistles  of 

political  features  of  the  countries  through  which  he  ^^"'" 
passed!  Setting  out  from  Antioch  on  his  second  missionary  tour, 
accompanied  by  Silas,  he  passed  through  Syria  and  Cilicia,  visiting, 
doubtless,  his  early  home  at  Tarsus  (Acts  xv,  40,  41).  Thence  he 
passed  over  the  vast  mountain-barrier  on  the  north  of  Cilicia,  and, 
after  visiting  Derbe  and  Lystra,  where  he  attached  Timothy  to  him 
as  a  companion  in  travel,  he  went  through  the  region  of  Phrygia 
and  Galatia,  where,  notwithstanding  his  physical  infirmity,  he  was 
received  as  an  angel  of  God  (Gal.  iv,  13).  Passing  westward,  and 
having  been  forbidden  to  preach  in  the  western  parts  of  Asia  Minor 
(Acts  xvi,  6),  he  came  with  his  companions  to  Troas.  "  The  district 
of  Troas,"  observes  Howson,  "extending  from  Mt.  Ida  to  the  plain, 
watered  by  the  Simois  and  the  Scamander,  was  the  scene  of  the 
Trojan  War;  and  it  was  due  to  the  poetry  of  Homer  that  the  an- 
cient name  of  Priam's  kingdom  should  be  retained.  This  shore  had 
been  visited  on  many  memorable  occasions  by  the  great  men  of  this 
world.  Xerxes  passed  this  way  when  he  undertook  to  conquer 
Greece.  Julius  Cassar  was  here  after  the  battle  of  Pharsalia.  But, 
above  all,  we  associate  this  spot  with  a  European  conqueror  of 
Asia,  and  an  Asiatic  conqueror  of  Europe,  with  Alexander  of 
Macedon  and  Paul  of  Tarsus.  For  here  it  was  that  the  enthusiasm 
of  Alexander  was  kindled  at  the  tomb  of  Achilles  by  the  memory 
of  his  heroic  ancestors;  here  he  girded  on  his  armour,  and  from 
this  goal  he  started  to  overthrow  the  august  dynasties  of  the  East. 
And  now  the  great  apostle  rests  in  his  triumphal  progress  upon  the 
same  poetic  shore;  here  he  is  armed  by  heavenly  visitants  with  the 
weapons  of  a  warfare  that  is  not  carnal,  and  hence  he  is  sent  forth 
to  subdue  all  the  powers  of  the  West,  and  bring  the  civilization  of 
the  world  into  captivity  to  the  obedience  of  Chi-ist."  * 

After  the  vision  and  the  Macedonian  call  received  at  this  place, 
he  sailed  from  Troas  and  came  to  Neapolis,  and  thence  to  Philippi, 
the  scene  of  many  memorable  events  (Acts  xvi,  12-40),  and  thence 
on   through   Amphipolis,    Apollonia,    Thessalonica,   and  Berea,   to 

'  Conybeare  and  Howson,  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  vol.  i,  page  280.  Fourth 
American  Edition.     New  York,  1855. 


^\ 


I 


236  PRINCIPLES   OF 

Athens.  There  Paul  waited,  alone  (comp.  1  Thess.  iii,  1),  for  his 
companions,  but  failed  not  meanwhile  to  preach  the  Gospel  to  the 
inquisitive  Athenians,  "  standing  in  the  midst  of  the  Areopagus " 
(Acts  xvii,  22).  After  this  he  passed  on  to  Corinth,  and  founded 
there  the  Church  to  which  he  subsequently  addressed  two  of  his 
most  important  epistles.  From  Corinth,  soon  after  his  arrival,  he 
sent  his  first  epistle  to  the  Thessalonians.  From  this  standpoint 
how  lifelike  and  real  are  all  the  personal  allusions  and  reminiscences 
of  this  his  first  epistle !  But  that  letter,  in  its  vivid  allusions  to  the 
near  coming  of  the  Lord,  awakened  great  excitement  among  the 
Thessalonians,  and  only  a  few  months  afterward  we  find  him  writ- 
ing his  second  epistle  to  them  to  allay  this  trouble  of  their  minds, 
and  to  assure  them  that  that  day  is  not  so  near  but  that  several 
important  events  must  first  come  to  pass  (2  Thess.  ii,  1-8).  A 
grouping  of  all  these  facts  and  suggestions  adds  vastly  to  one's 
interest  in  the  study  of  Paul's  epistles. 

Without  pursuing  further  the  course  of  the  a])ostles  life  and 
labours,  enough  has  been  said  to  show  what  light  and  interest  a 
knowledge  of  the  time  and  place  of  writing  gives  to  the  Epistles  of 
Paul.  The  situation  and  condition  of  the  churches  and  persons  ad- 
dressed in  his  epistles  should  also  be  carefully  sought  out.  His 
subsequent  epistles,  especially  those  to  the  Corinthians,  and  those  of 
his  imprisonment,  would  be  shorn  of  half  their  interest  and  value 
but  for  the  knowledge  we  elsewhere  obtain  of  the  i)ersons,  inci- 
dents, and  places  to  which  references  are  made.  Wluit  a  tender 
charm  hangs  about  the  Epistle  to  the  Pliilippians  from  our  knowl- 
edge of  the  apostle's  first  experiences  in  that  Roman  colony,  liis 
subsequent  visits  there,  and  the  thought  that  he  is  writing  from  liis 
imprisonment  in  Rome,  and  making  frequent  mention  of  his  bonds 
(Phil,  i,  7,  13,  14),  and  of  their  former  kindnesses  toward  him  (iv, 
15-18).' 

Thorough  inquiries  into  the  narratives  of  Scripture  have  evinced 
i„    ,   .  the  minute  accuracy  of  the  sacred  writers,  and  silenced 

Such  inquiries  ,  ''  '  . 

silence  inauei  many  cavils  of  infidelity.  The  treatise  of  James  Smith 
teaviia.  ^^  ^YiQ  Voyage  and  Shipwreck  of  St.  Paul "  furiiishcs_an 

unanswerable  argument  for  the  authenticity  „of_jhe__Acts  of  the 
Apostles.  The  author's  practical  experience  as  a  sailor,  his  resi- 
dence at  Malta,  his  familiar  intercourse  with  the  seamen  of  tlie 
Levant,  and  his  study  of  the  ships  of  the  ancients,  qualified  liim 

'Stanley's  History  <>f  the  Jewish  Church,  Farrar's  and  Gcikic's  works  on  the  Life  of 
Christ,  and  Farrar's,  Conyticare  and  IIowsoii's,  and  Lcwin's  Life  and  Epistles  of  St. 
Paul,  are  especially  rich  in  illustrations  of  the  subject  of  this  chapter. 

«  Third  Edition.     London,  1866. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  257 

pre-eminently  to  expound  the  last  two  chapters  of  the  Acts.  Ills 
volume  is  a  monument  of  painstaking  research,  and  throws  more 
light  upon  the  narrative  of  Paul's  voyage  from  Caesarea  to  Rome 
than  all  that  had  been  written  previously  on  that  subject.'  ,  / 

The  gi'eat  importance  of  ascertaining  the  historical  standpoint-^ 
of  an  author  is  notably  illustrated  by  the  controversy 

*'  n  T   ^  -r-i  ^^^     historical 

over  the  date  or  the  Apocalypse  ot  John.  It  that  j^ro-  standpoint  of 
phetical  book  was  written  before  the  destruction  of  ti^e  Apocalypse. 
Jerusalem,  a  number  of  its  particular  allusions  must  most  naturally 
be  understood  as  referring  to  that  city  and  its  fall.  If,  however,  it 
was  written  at  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Domitian  (about  A.  D.  96), 
as  many  have  believed,  another  system  of  interpretation  is  neces- 
sary to  explain  the  historical  allusions. 

Taking,  first,  the  external  evidence  touching  the  date  of  the 
Apocalypse,  it  seems  to  us  that  no  impartial  mind  can  fail  to  see 
that  it  preponderates  in  favor  of  the  later  date.  But  when  wc 
scrutinize  the  character  and  extent  of  this  evidence,  it  seems  equally 
clear  that  no  very  great  stress  can  safely  be  laid  upon  it.  For  it 
all  turns  upon  the  single  testimony  of  Irenseus,  who 
wrote,  according  to  the  best  authorities,  about  one  hun-  mony hangs  oa 
dred  years  after  the  death  of  John,  and  who  says  that  ^'"^'i®'^- 
in  boyhood  he  had  seen  and  conversed  with  Polycarp,  and  heard 
him  speak  of  his  familiar  intercourse  with  John."  This  fact  would, 
of  course,  make  his  testimony  of  peculiar  value,  but,  at  the  same 
time,  it  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  at  an  early  age  he  removed  to 

'  The  following  passage  from  Lewin  is  a  noteworthy  illustration  of  the  value  of 
personal  research  in  refuting  captious  objections  to  the  historical  accuracy  of  the  Bi- 
ble. "  It  is  objected  to  the  account  of  the  viper  fastening  upon  Paul's  hand,"  says 
Lewin,  "  that  there  is  no  wood  in  Malta,  except  at  Bosquetta,  and  that  there  are 
no  vipers  in  Malta.  How,  then,  it  is  said,  could  the  apostle  have  collected  the  sticks, 
and  how  could  a  viper  have  fastened  upon  his  hand  ?  But  when  I  visited  the  Bay  of 
St.  Paul,  in  1851,  by  sea,  I  observed  trees  growing  in  the  vicinity,  and  there  were  also 
fig-trees  growing  among  the  rocks  at  the  water's  edge  where  the  vessel  was  wrecked. 
But  there  is  a  better  explanation  still.  When  I  was  at  Malta  in  1853,  I  went  with 
two  companions  to  the  Bay  of  St.  Paul  by  land,  and  this  was  at  the  same  season  of 
the  year  as  when  the  wreck  occurred.  We  now  noticed  on  the  shore,  just  opposite 
the  scene  of  the  wreck,  eight  or  nine  stacks  of  small  faggots,  and  in  the  nearest  stack 
I  counted  twenty-five  bundles.  They  consisted  of  a  kind  of  thorny  heather,  and  had 
evidently  been  cut  for  firewood.  As  we  strolled  about,  my  companions,  whom  I  had 
quitted  to  make  an  observation,  put  up  a  viper,  or  a  reptile  having  the  appearance  of 
one,  which  escaped  into  the  bundle  of  sticks.  It  may  not  have  been  poisonous,  but 
was  like  an  adder,  and  was  quite  different  from  the  common  snake ;  one  of  my  fel- 
low-travellers was  quite  familiar  with  the  difference  between  snakes  and  adders,  and 
could  not  well  be  mistaken." — The  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  vol.  ii,  page  208. 


a 


Eusebius,  Ecclesiastical  History,  book  v,  chap. 


XX. 


238  PRINCIPLES   OF 

the  remote  West,  and  became  bishop  of  Lyons,  in  France,  far  from 
the  associations  of  his  early  life.  It  would,  therefore,  have  been  no 
strano-e  thing  if  he  had  somewhat  confounded  names  and  dates. 
His  testimony  is  as  follows :  "  We  therefore  do  not  run  the  risk  of 
pronouncing  positively  concerning  the  name  of  the  Antichrist  [hid- 
den in  the  number  606,  Rev.  xiii,  18],  for  if  it  were  necessary  to 
have  his  name  distinctly  announced  at  the  present  time,  it  would 
doubtless  have  been  announced  by  him  who  saw  the  Apocalypse; 
for  it  is  not  a  great  while  ago  that  it  [or  he]  was  seen  {ov6e  ydp  ttqo 
TToXXov  xQovov  eo)pd^7]),  but  almost  in  our  own  generation,  toward 
the  end  of  Domitian's  reign."  '  Here  it  should  be  noted  that  the 
subject  of  the  verb  kiogadr],  was  seen,  is  ambiguous,  and  may  be 
either  it,  referring  to  the  Apocalypse,  or  he,  referring  to  John  him- 
self. But  allowing  it  to  refer  to  the  Apocalypse,  we  have  then  this 
testimony  to  the  later  date. 

But  what  external  testimony  have  we  besides?  Only  Eusebius, 
who  lived  and  wrote  a  hundred  years  after  Irenreus,  and  who  ex- 
pressly quotes  Irenseus  as  his  authority.^  He  also  quotes  Clement 
of  Alexandria  as  saying  that  "after  the  tyrant  was  dead"  John 
returned  from  the  isle  of  Patmos  to  Ephesus.^  But  it  nowhere 
appears  that  Clement  indicated  who  the  tyrant  was,  or  that  he  be- 
lieved him  to  have  been  Domitian.  It  is  Eusebius  who  puts  that 
meaning  in  his  words,  and  it  is  matter  of  notoriety  that  Eusebius 
himself,  after  quoting  various  opinions,  leaves  the  question  of  the 
authorship  of  the  Apocalypse  in  doubt.*  Origen's  testimony  is  also 
adduced,  but  he  merely  says  that  John  was  condemned  by  "the 
king  of  the  Romans,"  not  intimating  at  all  who  that  king  was,  but 
calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  John  himself  did  not  name  his 
persecutor.  All  other  testimonies  on  the  subject  are  later  than 
these,  and  consequently  of  little  or  no  value.  If  Eusebius  was  de- 
pendent on  Iremeus  for  his  information,  it  is  not  likely  that  later 
writers  drew  from  any  other  source.  But  that  the  voice  of  antiq- 
uity was  not  altogether  uniform  on  this  subject  may  be  inferred 
from  the  fact  that  an  ancient  fragment  of  a  Latin  document,  prob- 
ably as  old  as  Iremeus'  writings,  mentions  Paul  as  following  the 
order  of  his  predecessor  John  in  writing  to  seven  churches.  The 
value  of  this  ancient  fragment  is  its  evidence  of  a  current  notion 
that  John's  Apocalypse  was  written  before  the  decease  of  Paul. 
Epiphanius  dates  John's  banishment  in  the  reign  of  Claudius  Caesar, 
and  the  superscription  to  the  Syriac  version  of  the  Apocalypse 

'  Adversus  Haereses,  v,  30. 

2  See  Eccles.  History,  book  iii,  18  and  v,  8.  'Ibid.,  book  iii,  23. 

*  See  especially  Alford's  Prolegomena  to  the  Revelation. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  239 

places  it  in  tlie  reign  of  Nero/  No  one  would  lay  great  stress  ujDon 
any  of  these  later  statements,  but  putting  them  all  together,  and 
letting  the  naked  facts  stand  apart,  shorn  of  all  the  artful  colour- 
ings of  partisan  writers,  we  find  the  external  evidence  of  John's 
writing  the  Apocalypse  at  the  close  of  Domitian's  reign  resting  on 
the  sole  testimony  of  Irenoeus,  who  wrote  a  hundred  years  after 
that  date,  and  whose  words  admit  of  two  different  meanings. 

One  clear  and  explicit  testimony,  when  not  opposed  by  other 
evidence,  would  be  allowed  by  all  fair  critics  to  control  the  argu- 
ment ;  but  not  so  when  many  other  considerations  tend  to  weaken 
it.  It  would  seem  much  easier  to  account  for  the  confusion  of  tra- 
dition on  the  date  of  John's  banishment  than  to  explain  away  the 
definite  references  of  the  Apocalypse  itself  to  the  temple,  the  court, 
and  the  city  as  still  standing  when  the  book  was  written.  All  tra- 
dition substantially  agrees,  that  John's  last  years  of  labour  were 
spent  among  the  churches  of  Western  Asia,  and  it  is  very  jDossible 
that  be  was  banished  to  the  isle  of  Patmos  during  the  reign  of 
Domitian.  That  banishment  may  have  occurred  long  after  John 
had  gone  to  the  same  island  for  another  reason,  and  later  writers, 
misapprehending  the  apostle's  words,  might  have  easily  confounded 
the  two  events. 

John's  own  testimony  is  that  he  "was  in  the  island  which  is 
called  Patmos  on  account  of  the  word  of  God  {dia  rbv  John's  own 
Xoyov  rov  -Senv)  and  the  testimony  of  Jesus"  (Rev.  i,  9).  testimony. 
Alford  says,  though  he  does  not  adopt  this  meaning,  that  "  in  St. 
Paul's  usage,  6td  would  here  signify /or  the  sake  of;  that  is,  for  the 
purpose  of  receiving ;  so  that  the  apostle  would  have  gone  to  Pat- 
mos [not  as  an  exile,  but]  by  special  revelation  in  order  to  receive 
this  Apocalypse.  Again,  keeping  to  this  meaning  of  did,  these 
words  may  mean  that  he  visited  Patmos  in  pursuance  of,  for  the 
purposes  of,  his  ordinary  apostolic  employment,  which  might  well 
be  designated  by  these  substantives.'""     This  proper  and  all-suffi- 

'  See  Stuart,  Commentary  on  the  Apocalypse,  vol.  i,  pp.  265-269. 

"  Greek  Testament,  in  loco.  See  also  De  Wette,  in  loco.  Alford's  "  three  objec- 
tions" appear  to  us  without  force;  for  (1)  the  mention  of  tribulation  fxn^  patience  in 
this  verse  by  no  means  requires  us  to  understand  that  he  was  then  suffering  from  ban- 
ishment. (2)  The  parallels  (chap,  vi,  9 ;  xx,  4)  which  he  cites  to  determine  the  use 
of  6id  are  offset  by  its  use  in  ii,  3 ;  iv,  11 ;  xii,  11 ;  xiii,  14 ;  xviii,  10,  15,  in  all  which 
places,  as  also  in  vi,  9  and  xx,  4,  it  is  to  be  understood  as  setting  forth  the  growd  or 
reason  of  what  is  stated.  This  meaning  holds  alike,  whether  we  believe  that  John 
went  to  Patmos  freely  or  as  an  exile,  on  account  of  the  word  of  God.  Comp.  Winer, 
N.  T.  Grammar,  §  49,  on  did.  (3)  The  traditional  banishment  of  John  to  Patmos  may 
have  occurred,  as  we  have  shown  above,  long  after  he  had  first  gone  there  on  account 
of  the  testimony  of  Jesus. 


N^ 


C40  PRINCIPLES   OF 

cient  explanation  of  his  words  allows  us  to  suppose  that  John  re- 
ceived the  Revelation  in  Patmos,  whither  he  had  gone,  either  by- 
some  special  divine  call,  or  in  pursuance  of  his  apostolic  labours. 
The  tradition,  therefore,  of  his  exile  under  Domitian  may  be  true, 
and  at  the  same  time  not  affect  the  question  of  the  date  of  the 
Apocalypse.' 

Turning  now  to  inquire  what  internal  evidence  may  be  found 
touchino-  the  historical  standpoint  of  the  writer,  observe : 

IntGrnal     gvI* 

dence  of  date.  (1)  That  no  critic  of  any  note  has  ever  claimed  that  the 
Six  points.  later  date  is  requii-ed  by  any  internal  evidence.  (2)  On 
the  contrary,  if  John  the  apostle  is  the  author,  the  comparatively 
rouo-h  Hebraic  style  ot;  the  language  unquestionably  argues  for  it 
an  earlier  date  than  his  Gospel  or  Epistles.  For,  special  pleading 
aside,  it  must  on  all  rational  grounds  be  conceded,  that  a  Hebrew, 
in  the  supposed  condition  of  John,  would,  after  years  of  intercourse 
and  labour  in  the  churches  of  Asia,  acquire  by  degrees  a  purer 
Greek  style.  (3)  The  address  "  to  the  seven  churches  which  are  in 
Asia"  (i,  4,  11),  implies  that,  at  this  time,  there  were  only  seven 
churches  in  that  Asia  where  Paul  was  once  forbidden  by  the  Spirit 
to  speak  the  word  (Asts  xvi,  6,  7).  Macdonald  says,  "An  earth- 
quake, in  the  ninth  year  of  Nero's  reign,  overwhelmed  both  Lao- 
dicea  and  Colossre  (Pliny,  Hist.  Nat.,  v,  41),  and  the  church  at  the 
latter  place  does  not  appear  to  have  been  restored.  As  the  two 
places  were  in  close  proximity,  what  remained  of  the  church  at 
Colossaj  probably  became  identified  with  the  one  at  Laodicea. 
The  churches  at  Tralles  and  Magnesia  could  not  have  been  estab- 
lished until  a  considerable  time  after  the  Apocalypse  was  written. 
Those  Avho  contend  for  the  later  date,  when  there  must  have  been 
a  greater  number  of  churches  than  seven  in  the  region  designated 
by  the  apostle,  fail  to  give  any  sufficient  reason  for  his  mentioning 
no  more.  That  they  mystically  or  symbolically  represent  others  is 
surely  not  such  a  reason.'""  (4)  The  prominence  in  which  persecu- 
tion from  the  Jews  is  set  forth  in  the  Epistles  to  the  seven  churches 
also  argues  an  early  date.  After  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  Christian 
persecution  and  troubles  came  almost  altogether  from  pagan  sources, 
and  Jewish  opposition  and  Judaizing  heretics  became  of  little  note. 

'  Any  one  who  will  compare  the  rapidity  of  raul's  movements  on  Jiis  missionary 
journeys,  and  note  how  he  addressed  epistles  to  some  of  his  churches  (e.  g.,  Tlicssa- 
lonians)  a  few  months  after  his  first  visitation,  will  have  no  diOiculty  in  understand- 
ing how  John  could  have  visited  all  the  seven  cliurches  of  Asia,  and  also  have  gone 
thence  to  Patmos  and  received  the  Revolaiion,  within  a  year  after  departing  from 
Jerusalem.     But  John,  like  Paul,  probably  wrote  to  churches  lie  had  not  visited. 

2  The  Life  and  Writings  of  John,  p.  155. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  241 

(5)  A  most  weighty  argument  for  the  early  date  appears  in  the 
mention  of  the  temple,  court,  and  city  in  chajoter  xi,  1-3.  These 
references  and  the  further  designation,  in  verse  8,  of  that  city 
"  -vhich  spiritually  is  called  Sodom  and  Egypt,  wliere  also  their 
Lord  was  crucified,"  obviously  imply  that  the  Jewish  temple,  court, 
and  city  were  yet  standing.  To  plead  that  these  familiar  appella- 
tives are  not  real,  but  only  mystical  allusions,  is  to  assume  the  very 
point  in  question.  The  most  simple  reference  should  stand  unless 
convincing  reasons  to  the  contrary  be  shown.  When  the  writer 
proceeds  to  characterize  the  city  by  a  proper  symbolical  name,  he 
calls  it  Sodom  and  Egypt,  and  is  careful  to  tell  us  that  it  is  so  called 
spiritually  (TrvevixariKOjg),  but,  as  if  to  prevent  any  possibility  of 
misunderstanding  his  reference,  he  adds  that  it  is  the  place  where 
the  Lord  was  crucified. 

(6)  Finally,  what  should  especially  impress  every  reader  is  the 
emphatic  statement,  placed  in  the  very  title  of  the  book,  and  re- 
peated in  one  form  and  another  again  and  again,  that  this  is  a 
revelation  of  "  things  which  must  shortly  {ev  rdx^c)  come  to  pass," 
and  the  time  of  which  is  near  at  hand  (eyyt'f,  Rev.  i,  1,3;  xxii,  6,  7, 
10,  12,  20).  If  the  seer,  writing  a  few  years  before  the  terrible 
catastrophe,  had  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  its  attendant 
woes  before  him,  all  these  expressions  have  a  force  and  definiteness 
which  every  interpreter  must  recognize.'    But  if  the  things  contem- 

'  The  trend  of  modern  criticism  is  unmistaliably  toward  the  adoption  of  the  early 
date  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  yet  the  best  scholars  differ.  Elliott,  Hengstenberg, 
Lange,  Alford,  and  Whedon  contend  strongly  that  the  testimony  of  Irenaeus  and  the 
ancient  tradition  ought  to  control  the  question ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  Lucke, 
Neander,  De  Wette,  Ewald,  Bleek,  Auberlen,  Hilgenfeld,  Diisterdieck,  Stuart,  Macdon- 
ald,  Davidson,  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Glasgow,  Farrar,  Westcott,  Cowles,  and  Schaff  main- 
tain that  the  book,  according  to  its  own  internal  evidence,  must  have  been  written  be- 
fore the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  The  last-named  scholar,  in  the  new  edition  of  his 
Church  History  (vol.  i,  pp.  8M-8Z1),  revokes  his  acceptance  of  the  Domitian  date 
which  he  affirmed  thirty  years  ago,  and  now  maintains  that  internal  evidence  for  an 
earlier  date  outweighs  the  external  tradition.  Writers  on  both  sides  of  this  question 
have  probably  been  too  much  influenced  by  some  theory  of  the  seven  kings  in  chap, 
xvii,  10  (see  below,  p.  481),  and  have  placed  the  composition  much  later  than  valid 
evidence  warrants.  Glasgow  (The  Apoc.  Trans,  and  Expounded,  pp.  9-38)  adduces 
proof  not  easy  to  be  set  aside  that  the  Revelation  was  written  before  any  of  the 
Epistles,  probably  somewhere  between  A.  D.  50  and  54.  Is  it  not  supposable  that  one 
reason  why  Paul  was  forbidden  to  preach  the  word  in  Western  Asia  (Acts  xvi,  6)  was 
that  John  was  either  already  there,  or  about  to  enter?  The  prevalent  opinion  that 
the  First  Epistle  of  John  was  written  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  rests  on  no  certain 
•evidence.  To  assume,  from  the  writer's  use  of  the  term  "  little  children,"  that  he  was 
very  far  advanced  in  years,  is  futile.  John  was  probably  no  older  than  Paul,  but 
some  time  before  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  the  latter  was  wont  to  speak  of  himself  as 
"Paul  the  aged."  Philem.  9. 
16 


243  PRINCIPLES   OF 

plated  were  in  the  distant  future,  these  simple  words  of  time  must 

be  subjected  to  the  most  violent  and  unnatural  treatment  in  order  to 

make  the  statements  of  the  writer  compatible  with  the  exposition. 

A  consideration  of  these  evidences,  external  and  internal,  of  the 

^  ,         date  of  the  Apocalypse,  shows  what  delicacy  and  dis- 
Great    delicacy        ...  ...  .  .  •' 

and  discrimina-   crimmation  are  requisite  in  an  interpreter  in  order  to 

tioQ  essential,  determine  the  historical  standpoint  of  such  a  prophet- 
ical book.  As  far  as  possible,  all  systems  of  jDrophetical  interpreta- 
tion should  be  held  in  abeyance  until  that  question  is  determined ; 
but  it  may  become  necessary,  in  view  of  the  conflicting  evidences 
of  the  date  and  the  difficulties  of  the  book  itself,  to  withhold  all 
judgment  as  to  the  historical  standpoint  of  the  writer  until  we  have 
tried  the  different  methods  of  interpretation,  and  have  thus  had 
opportunity  to  judge  which  exposition  affords  the  best  solution  of 
the  difficulties. 

The  controversy  over  the  date  of  Daniel's  prophecies  springs 
mainly  from  the  miraculous  narratives  recorded  in  the  first  part  of 
the  book,  and  from  the  rationalistic  assumption  that  neither  mir- 
acles nor  such  detailed  prediction  of  future  events  as  the  visions 
^     ^.  ,  and  dreams  involve  are  consistent  with  scientific  histor- 

Questions      of    ...    , 

historical  criti-  ical  criticism.  The  question  is  one  that  belongs  more 
cism involved,    pj-^^p^jj-jy  ^q  ^]^q   department  of  Biblical  Introduction; 

but  it  is  evident  that  the  determining  of  the  date  of  the  prophecies 
is  essential  to  their  interpretation,  and  if  it  be  admitted  that  they 
were  written  after  the  events  which  they  assume  to  foretell,  the 
credibility  of  the  book  is  necessarily  destroyed,  and  any  scientific 
exposition  of  it  must  thence  proceed  as  if  dealing  Avith  a  forgery  or 
a  pious  fraud.  The  same  may  be  said  of  that  criticism  which  places 
the  composition  of  the  Pentateuch  long  after  the  days  of  Moses. 
Such  a  hypothesis  forces  the  interpreter  who  adopts  it  to  give  an 
unnatural  meaning  to  all  those  words  and  acts  which  are  attributed 
to  Moses,  and  which  assume  the  historical  standpoint  of  the  great 
Lawgiver  of  Israel.  The  various  rationalistic  theories  of  interpreta- 
tion, which  ignore  or  deny  the  supernatural,  and  proceed  on  the 
assumption  that  any  of  the  sacred  writers  feign  a  historical  stand- 
point which  they  did  not  really  occupy,  are  continually  changing, 
and  lead  only  to  confusion. 

This,  then,  is  to  be  held  as  a  canon  of  interpretation,  that  aU  due 
regard  must  be  had  to  the  person  and  circumstances  of  the  author, 
the  time  and  j^h^ce  of  his  writing,  and  the  occasion  and  reasons 
which  led  him  to  write.  Nor  must  we  omit  similar  inquiry  into  the 
character,  conditions,  and  history  of  those  for  whom  the  book  was 
written,  and  of  those  also  of  whom  the  book  makes  mention. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  243 


CHAPTER   X. 

FIGURATIVE     LANGUAGE. 

Those  portions  of  tlie  Ploly  Scriptures  which  are  written  in  figura- 
tive language  call  for  special  care  in  their  interpretation.  Tropes  many 
When  a  word  is  employed  in  another  than  its  primary  and  various, 
meaning,  or  applied  to  some  object  different  from  that  to  which  it 
is  appropriated  in  common  usage,  it  is  called  a  trope.'  The  neces- 
sities and  pui'poses  of  human  speech  requii-e  the  frequent  use  of 
words  in  such  a  tropical  sense.  We  have  already  seen,  under  the 
head  of  the  ksus  loquendl  of  words,  how  many  terms  come  to  have 
a  variety  of  meanings.  Some  words  lose  their  primary  signification 
altogether,  and  are  employed  only  in  a  secondary  or  acquired  sense. 
Most  words  in  every  language  have  been  used  or  are  capable  of  be- 
ing used  in  this  way.  And  very  many  words  have  so  long  and  so 
constantly  maintained  a  figurative  sense  that  their  primary  meaning 
has  become  obsolete  and  forgotten.  How  few  remember  that  the 
word  Imo  denotes  that  tvhich  is  laid /  or  that  the  common  expres- 
sions riffht  and  wrong,  which  have  almost  exclusively  a  moral  im- 
port, originally  signified  straight  and  crooked.  Other  words  are  so 
commonly  used  in  a  twofold  sense  that  we  immediately  note  when 
they  are  employed  literally  and  when  figuratively.  When  James, 
Cephas,  and  John  are  called  pillars  of  the  Church  (Gal.  ii,  9),  we  see 
at  once  that  the  word  pillars  is  a  metaphor.  And  when  the  Church 
itself  is  said  to  be  "built  upon  the  foundation  of  the  apostles  and 
prophets  "  (Eph.  ii,  20),  we  know  that  a  figure,  the  image  of  a  house 
or  temple,  is  meant  to  be  depicted  before  the  mind. 

The  origin  of  figures  of  speech  has  been  generally  attributed 
to  the  poverty  of  languages  in  their  earliest  stages,  q^  j^  ^^^  ^^_ 
The  scarcity  of  words  required  the  use  of  one  and  the   cessityofiigur- 

T  •  •    .         f  •  1.1.-KT      ^  ^1    ative  lauffuage. 

same  word  m  a  variety  of  meanings.  "  JN  o  language, 
says  Blair,  "  is  so  copious  as  to  have  a  separate  word  for  every  sep- 
arate idea.  Men  naturally  sought  to  abridge  this  labour  of  multi- 
plying words  ad  infinitum  ;  and,  in  order  to  lay  less  burden  on  their 
memories,  made  one  word,  which  they  had  already  appropriated  to 
a  certain  idea  or  object,  stand  also  for  some  other  idea  or  object 

'  From  the  Greek  rpoTrof,  a  turn  or  change  of  language  ;  that  is,  a  word  turned 
from  its  primary  usage  to  another  meaning. 


244  PRINCIPLES   OF 

between  which  and  the  primary  one  they  found  or  fancied  some 
relation."  ' 

But  it  is  not  solely  in  the  scarcity  of  words  that  we  are  to  find 
the  origin  of  figurative  language.  The  natural  operations  of  the 
human  mind  prompt  men  to  trace  analogies  and  make  comparisons. 
Pleasing  emotions  are  excited  and  the  imagination  is  gratified  by 
the  use  of  metaphors  and  similes.  Were  we  to  sui)pose  a  language 
suificiently  copious  in  words  to  express  all  possible  conceptions,  the 
human  mind  would  still  requii-e  us  to  compare  and  contrast  our 
concepts,  and  such  a  procedure  would  soon  necessitate  a  variety  of 
figures  of  speech.  So  much  of  our  knowledge  is  acquired  through  the 
senses,  that  all  our  abstract  ideas  and  our  spiritual  language  have  a 
material  basis.  "  It  is  not  too  much  to  say,"  observes  Max  Miiller, 
"that  the  whole  dictionary  of  ancient  religion  is  made  up  of  meta- 
phors. With  us  these  metaphors  are  all  forgotten.  We  speak  of 
spirit  without  thinking  of  breath,  of  heaven  without  thinking  of 
sky,  of  pardon  without  thinking  of  a  release,  of  revelation  without 
thinking  of  a  veil.  But  in  ancient  language  every  one  of  these 
words,  nay,  every  word  that  does  not  refer  to  sensuous  objects,  is 
still  in  a  chrysalis  stage,  half  material  and  half  spiritual,  and  I'ising 
and  falling  in  its  character  according  to  the  capacities  of  speakers 
and  hearers."  * 

And  more  than  this.  May  we  not  safely  affirm  that  the  analogies 
Figures  of  traceable  between  the  natural  and  spiritual  worlds  are 
fivZe  hTrmS  P^^'*^  ^^  ^  divine  harmony  which  it  is  the  noblest  men- 
nies.  tal  exercise  to  discover  and  unfold?     In   his  chapter, 

"  On  Teacliing  by  Parables,"  Trench  has  the  following  profound 
observations:  "It  is  not  merely  that  these  analogies  assist  to  make 
the  truth  intelligible,  or,  if  intelligible  before,  present  it  more  viv- 
idly to  the  mind,  which  is  all  that  some  will  allow  them.  Their 
jjower  lies  deeper  than  this,  in  the  harmony  unconsciously  felt  by 
all  men,  and  by  deeper  minds  continually  recognized  and  plainly 
perceived,  between  the  natural  and  spiritual  worlds,  so  that  analo- 
gies from  the  first  are  felt  to  be  something  more  than  illustrations, 
happily  but  yet  arbitrarily  chosen.  They  are  arguments,  and  may 
be  alleged  as  witnesses;  the  world  of  nature  being  throughout  a 
witness  for  the  world  of  spirit,  proceeding  from  the  same  hand, 
growing  out  of  the  same  root,  and  being  constituted  for  that  very 
end.  All  lovers  of  truth  readily  acknowledge  these  mysterious 
harmonies,  and  the  force  of  arguments  derived  from  them.  To 
ihem  the  things  on  earth  are  copies  of  the  things  in  heaven.     They 

'  Rhetoric,  Lecture  xiv.  On  the  Origin  and  Nature  of  Figurati^'C  Language. 
'Science  of  Religion,  p.  118. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  245 

know  that  the  earthly  tabei'nacle  is  made  after  the  pattern  of  things 
seen  in  the  mount  (Exod.  xXv,  40;  1  Chron.  xxviii,  11,  12);  and  the 
question  suggested  by  the  angel  in  Milton  is  often  forced  upon 
their  meditations — 

'  What  if  earth 
Be  but  the  shadow  of  heaven  and  things  therein 
Each  to  other  like,  more  than  on  earth  is  thought  ? ' 

For  it  is  a  great  misunderstanding  of  the  matter  to  think  of  these 
as  happily,  but  yet  arbitrarily,  chosen  illustrations,  taken  with  a 
skilful  selection  from  the  great  stock  and  storehouse  of  unappro- 
priated images;  from  whence  it  would  have  been  possible  that  the 
same  skill  might  have  selected  others  as  good  or  nearly  as  good. 
Rather  they  belong  to  one  another,  the  type  and  the  thing  typified, 
by  an  inward  necessity ;  they  were  linked  together  long  before  by 
the  law  of  a  secret  affinity.  It  is  not  a  happy  accident  which  has 
yielded  so  wondrous  an  analogy  as  that  of  husband  and  wife  to  set 
forth  the  mystery  of  Christ's  relation  to  his  elect  Church.  There 
is  far  more  in  it  than  this:  the  earthly  relation  is  indeed  but  a  low- 
er form  of  the  heavenly,  on  which  it  rests,  and  of  which  it  is  the 
utterance.  When  Christ  spoke  to  Nicodemus  of  a  new  birth,  it 
was  not  merely  because  birth  into  this  natural  world  was  the  most 
suitable  figure  that  could  be  found  for  the  expression  of  that  spir- 
itual act  which,  without  any  power  of  our  own,  is  accomplished 
upon  us  when  we  are  brought  into  God's  kingdom;  but  all  the  cir- 
cumstances of  this  natural  birth  had  been  pre-ordained  to  bear  the 
burden  of  so  great  a  mystery.  The  Lord  is  king,  not  borrowing 
this  title  from  the  kings  of  the  earth,  but  having  lent  his  own  title 
to  them— and  not  the  name  only,  but  so  ordering,  that  all  true  rule 
and  government  upon  earth,  with  its  righteous  laws,  its  stable  ordi- 
nances, its  jDunishment  and  its  grace,  its  majesty  and  its  terror, 
should  tell  of  Him  and  of  his  kingdom  which  ruleth  over  all — so 
that  "  kingdom  of  God "  is  not  in  fact  a  figurative  expression,  but 
most  literal:  it  is  rather  the  earthly  kingdoms  and  the  earthly  kings 
that  are  figures  and  shadows  of  the  true.  And  as  in  the  world  of 
man  and  human  relations,  so  also  is  it  in  the  world  of  nature.  The 
untended  soil  which  yields  thorns  and  briers  as  its  natural  harvest  is 
a  permanent  type  and  enduring  parable  of  man's  heart,  which  has 
been  submitted  to  the  same  curse,  and,  without  a  watchful  spiritual 
husbandry,  will  as  surely  put  forth  its  briers  and  its  thorns.  The 
weeds  that  vnll  mingle  during  the  time  of  growth  with  the  corn, 
and  yet  are  separated  from  it  at  the  last,  tell  ever  one  and  the  same 
tale  of  the  present  admixture  and  future  sundering  of  the  righteous 


246  PRINCIPLES   OP 

and  the  wicked.  The  decaying  of  the  insignificant,  unsightly  seed 
in  the  earth,  and  the  rising  up  out  of  that  decay  and  death  of  the 
graceful  stalk  and  the  fruitful  ear,  contain  evermore  the  prophecy 
of  the  final  resurrection,  even  as  this  is  itself  in  its  kind  a  resurrec- 
tion— the  same  process  at  a  lower  stage — the  same  power  putting 
itself  forth  upon  meaner  things.  .  .  .  And  thus,  besides  his  revela- 
tion in  words,  God  has  another  and  an  elder,  and  one  indeed  with- 
out Avhich  it  is  inconceivable  how  that  other  could  be  made,  for 
from  this  it  appropriates  all  its  signs  of  communication.  This  en- 
tire moral  and  visible  world  from  first  to  last,  with  its  kings  and  its 
subjects,  its  parents  and  its  children,  its  sun  and  its  moon,  its  sow- 
ing and  its  harvest,  its  light  and  its  darkness,  its  sleeping  and  its 
waking,  its  birth  and  its  death,  is  from  beginning  to  end  a  mighty 
parable,  a  great  teaching  of  supersensuous  truth,  a  help  at  once  to 
our  faith  and  to  our  understanding." ' 

The  principal  sources  of  the  figurative  language  of  the  Bible  are 
Poiir«'s  of  scrip-  the  physical  features  of  the  Holy  Land,  the  habits  and 
turai  imaRery.  customs  of  its  ancient  tribes,  and  the  forms  of  Israel- 
itish  worship.  All  these  sources  should,  accordingly,  be  closely 
studied  in  order  to  the  interpretation  of  the  figurative  portions  of 
the  Scriptures.  As  we  traced  a  Divine  Providence  in  the  use  of 
Hebrew,  Chaldee,  and  Greek  as  the  languages  of  God's  inspired 
revelation,  and  as  we  believe  that  the  progeny  of  Abraham  through 
Jacob  were  the  divinely  chosen  people  to  receive  and  guard  the 
oracles  of  God,  so  may  we  also  believe  that  the  Land  of  Promise 
was  an  essential  element  in  the  process  of  developing  and  perfect- 
ing the  rhetorical  form  of  the  sacred  records.  "  It  is  neither  fiction 
nor  extravagance,"  says  Thomson,  "  to  call  this  land  a  microcosm — 
a  little  world  in  itself,  embracing  every  thing  which  in  the  thought 
of  the  Creator  would  be  needed  in  developing  this  language  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  Nor  is  it  easy  to  see  how  the  end  sought 
could  have  been  reached  at  all  without  just  such  a  land,  furnislied 
and  fitted  up,  as  this  was,  by  the  overruling  providence  of  God. 
All  were  needed — mountain  and  valley,  hill  and  plain,  lake  and 
river,  sea  and  sky,  summer  and  winter,  seedtime  and  harvest,  trees, 
shrubs,  and  flowers,  beasts  and  birds,  men  and  women,  tribes  and 
nation*.,  governments  and  religions  false  and  true,  and  other  things 
innumerable;  none  of  which  could  be  spare<l.  Tliink,  if  you  can, 
of  a  Bible  with  all  these  left  out,  or  others  essentially  different  sub- 
stituted in  their  place — a  Bible  without  patriarch  or  pilgrimage, 
with  no  bondage  in  Egypt,  or  deliverance  therefrom,  no  Red  Sea, 
no  Sinai  with  its  miracles,  no  wilderness  of  wandering  with  all  the 

1  Notes  on  the  Parables,  pp.  18-21. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  247 

included  scenes  and  associated  incidents ;  without  a  Jordan  with  a 
Canaan  over  against  it,  or  a  Dead  Sea  with  Sodom  beneath  it;  no 
Moriah  with  its  temple,  no  Zion  with  palaces,  nor  Hinnom  below 
with  the  fire  and  the  worm  that  never  die.  Whence  could  have 
come  our  divine  songs  and  psalms,  if  the  sacred  poets  had  lived  in 
a  land  without  mountain  or  valley,  where  were  no  plains  covered 
over  with  corn,  no  fields  clothed  with  green,  no  hills  planted  with 
the  olive,  the  fig,  and  the  vine?  All  are  needed,  and  all  do  good 
service,  from  the  oaks  of  Bashan  and  the  cedars  of  Lebanon  to  the 
liyssop  that  springeth  out  of  the  wall.  The  tiny  mustard-seed  has 
its  moral,  and  lilies  their  lessons.  Thorns  and  thistles  utter  ad- 
monitions, and  revive  sad  memories.  The  sheep  and  the  fold,  the 
shepherd  and  his  dog,  the  ass  and  his  owner,  the  ox  and  his  goad, 
the  camel  and  his  burden,  the  horse  with  neck  clothed  with  thun- 
der; lions  that  roar,  wolves  that  raven,  foxes  that  destroy,  harts 
panting  for  water  brooks,  and  roes  feeding  among  lilies,  doves  in 
their  windows,  sparrows  on  the  housetop,  storks  in  the  heavens, 
eagles  hasting  to  their  pi"ey;  things  great  and  small;  the  busy  bee 
improving  each  shining  hour,  and  the  careful  ant  laying  up  store  in 
harvest — nothing  too  large  to  serve,  too  small  to  aid.  These  are 
merely  random  specimens  out  of  a  world  of  rich  materials ;  but  we 
must  not  forget  that  they  are  all  found  in  this  land  where  the  dia- 
lect of  God's  spiritual  kingdom  was  to  be  taught  and  spoken."' 

It  is  scarcely  necessary,  and,  indeed,  quite  impracticable,  to  lay 
down  specific  rules  for  determining  when  language  is  g  j^ 
used  figuratively  and  when  literally.  It  is  an  old  and  unnecessary  and 
oft-repeated  hermeneutical  principle  that  words  should  ^'^'p^^^^^^^^^^- 
be  understood  in  their  literal  sense  unless  such  literal  interpreta- 
tion involves  a  manifest  contradiction  or  absurdity.  It  should  be 
observed,  however,  that  this  principle,  when  reduced  to  practice, 
becomes  simply  an  appeal  to  every  man's  rational  judgment.  And 
what  to  one  seems  very  absurd  and  improbable  may  be  to  another 
altogether  simple  and  self -consistent.  Some  expositors  have  claimed 
to  see  necessity  for  departing  from  the  literal  sense  where  others 
saw  none,  and  it  seems  impossible  to  establish  any  fixed  rule  that 
will  govern  in  all  cases.  Reference  must  be  had  to  the  general 
character  and  style  of  the  particular  book,  to  the  i:)lan  and  purj^ose 
of  the  author,  and  to  the  context  and  scope  of  the  particular  passage 
in  question.     Especially  should  strict  regard  be  had  to  the  usage 

'  The  Ph vsical  Basis  of  our  Spiritual  Language ;  by  W.  M.  Thomson,  in  the 
Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  January,  18*72.  Compare  the  same  author's  articles  on  The 
Natural  Basis  of  our  Spiritual  Language  in  the  same  periodical  for  Jan.,  1873;  Jan., 
1874;  Jan.,  187.5;  July,  1876;  and  Jan.,  1877. 


248  PRINCIPLES   OP 

of  the  sacred  -writers,  as  determined  by  a  thorough  collation  and' 
comparison  of  all  parallel  passages.  The  same  general  principles, 
by  which  we  ascertain  the  grammatico-historical  sense,  apply  also 
to  the  interpretation  of  figurative  language,  and  it  should  never  be 
forgotten  that  the  figurative  portions  of  the  Bible  are  as  certain 
and  truthful  as  the  most  prosaic  chapters.  Metaphors,  allegories, 
parables,  and  symbols  are  divinely  chosen  forms  of  setting  forth 
the  oracles  of  God,  and  Ave  must  not  suppose  their  meaning  to  be 
so  vague  and  uncertain  as  to  be  past  finding  out.  In  the  main,  we 
believe  the  figurative  parts  of  the  Scriptures  are  not  so  difiicult  to 
understand  as  many  have  imagined.  By  a  careful  and  judicious 
discrimination  the  interpreter  should  aim  to  determine  the  char- 
acter and  purport  of  each  particular  trope,  and  explain  it  in  harmony 
with  the  common  laws  of  language,  and  the  author's  context,  scope, 
and  plan. 

Figures  of  speech  have  been  distributed  into  two  great  classes, 
,       ,     figures  of  words  and  figures  of  thought.     The  distinc- 

Figrures  of  words      _»      _  •^  => 

and  iigures  of  tion  is  an  easy  one  in  that  a  figure  of  words  is  one  in 
thought.  which  the  image  or  resemblance  is  confined  to  a  single 

word,  whereas  a  figure  of  thought  may  require  for  its  expression  a 
great  many  words  and  sentences.  Metaphor  and  metonomy  are  fig- 
ures of  words,  in  which  the  comparison  is  reduced  to  a  single  expres- 
sion, as  when,  characterizing  Herod,  Jesus  said,  "  Go  and  say  to  that 
/ba;"  (Luke  xiii,  32).  In  Psalm  xviii,  2,  w^e  find  seven  figures  of 
words  crowded  into  a  single  verse:  "Jehovah,  ray  rock  ('y^P),  and 
my  fortress,  and  my  deliverer;  my  God,  my  rock  ('11^*) — I  will  seek 
refuge  in  him; — my  shield  and  horn  of  my  salvation,  my  height." 
Figures  of  thought,  on  the  other  hand,  are  seen  in  similes,  alle- 
gories, and  parables,  where  no  single  word  will  suflSce  to  convey 
the  idea  intended,  but  an  entire  passage  or  section  must  be  taken 
together.  But  this  classification  of  figures  will  be  of  little  value  in 
the  study  of  the  figurative  language  of  the  Scriptures. 

All  figures  of  speech  are  founded  upon  some  Resemblance  or  rela- 
tion which  different  objects  bear  to  one  another,  and  it  often  hap- 
pens, in  rapid  and  brilliant  style,  that  a  cause  is  put  for  its  effect,  or 
an  effect  for  its  cause ;  or  the  name  of  a  subject  is  used  when  only 
some  adjunct  or  associated  circumstance  is  intended.  This  figure 
Metonymy  of  of  speech  is  Called  Metonymy,  from  the  Greek  iJ.eTd, 
cause  and  effect,  clenoting  chanf/e,  and  ovofia,  a  name.  Such  change  and 
substitution  of  one  name  for  another  give  language  a  force  and 
impressiveness  not  otherwise  attainable.  Thus,  Job  is  represented 
as  saying,  "My  arrow  is  incurable"  (Job  xxxiv,  6) ;  where  bj'^  arrow 
is  evidently  meant  a  wound  caused  by  an  arrow,  and  allusion  is 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  249 

made  to  chapter  vi,  4,  where  the  bitter  afflictions  of  Job  are  repre- 
sented as  caused  by  the  arrows  of  the  Almighty.  So  again  in  Luke 
xvi,  29  and  xxiv,  27,  Moses  and  the  prophets  are  used  for  the  writ- 
ings of  which  they  were  the  authors.  The  name  of  a  patriarch  is 
sometimes  used  when  his  posterity  is  intended  (Gen.  ix,  27,  Amos 
vii,  9).  In  Gen.  xlv,  21;  Num.  iii,  16;  Deut.  xvii,  6,  the  word  mouth 
is  used  for  saying  or  commandment  which  issues  from  one's  mouth. 
"According  to  the  mouth  {order  or  command)  of  Pharaoh."  "Ac- 
cording to  the  mouth  (word)  of  Jehovah."  "At  the  mouth  (word, 
testimony)  of  two  witnesses  or  three  witnesses  shall  the  dying  one 
(nrsn,  the  one  appointed  to  die,  or  worthy  of  death,)  be  put  to 
death."  The  words  lip  and  tongue  are  used  in  a  similar  Avay  in 
Prov.  xii,  19,  and  frequently.  "The  lip  of  truth  shall  be  estab- 
lished forever;  but  only  for  a  moment  [Heb.  until  I  shall  wink] 
the  tongue  of  falsehood."  Comp.  Prov.  xvii,  7;  xxv,  15.  In  Eze- 
kiel  xxiii,  29,  "They  shall  take  away  all  thy  labour,  and  leave  thee 
naked,"  the  word  labour  is  used  instead  of  earnings  or  results  of 
labour.  All  such  cases  of  metonymy — and  examples  might  be 
multij^lied  indefinitely — are  commonly  classified  under  the  head  of 
Metonymy  of  cause  and  effect.  To  this  same  class  belong  also  such 
passages  as  Exod.  vii,  19,  where,  instead  of  vessels,  the  names  of 
the  materials  of  which  they  were  made  are  used :  "  Stretch  out  thy 
hand  over  the  waters  of  Egypt  ,  .  .  and  there  shall  be  blood  in  all 
the  land  of  Egypt,  both  in  Avood  and  in  stone;"  that  is,  in  wooden 
vessels  and  stone  reservoirs. 

Another  use  of  this  figure  occurs  where  some  adjunct,  associated 
idea,  or  circumstance  is  put  for  the  main  subject,  and  vice 
versa.  Thus,  in  Lev.  xix,  32,  n3''E^,  gray  hair,  hoariness,  subject  and  ad- 
is  used  for  a  person  of  advanced  age :  "  Thou  shalt  rise  •'"°'^*^' 
up  before  the  hoary  head."  Comp.  Gen.  xlii,  38:  "Ye  will  bring 
down  my  gray  hairs  in  sorrow  to  the  grave."  When  Moses  com- 
mands the  elders  of  Israel  to  take  a  lamb  according  to  their  families 
and  "kill  the  passoyer"  (Exod.  xii,  21),  he  evidently  uses  the  word 
passover  for  the  paschal  lamb.  In  Hosea  i,  2,  it  is  written :  "  The 
land  has  grievously  committed  whoredom."  Here  the  word  land  is 
used  by  metonymy  for  the  Israelitish  people  dwelling  in  the  land. 
So  also,  in  Matt,  iii,  5,  Jerusalem  and  Judea  are  put  for  the  people 
that  inhabited  those  places :  "  Then  went  out  unto  him  Jerusalem 
and  all  Judea  and  all  the  region  round  about  the  Jordan."  The 
metonymy  of  the  subject  for  its  adjunct  is  also  seen  in  passages 
where  the  container  is  put  for  the  thing  contained,  as,  "  Thou  pre- 
parest  a  table  before  me  in  the  presence  of  my  enemies"  (Psa, 
xxiii,  5).     "Blessed  shall  be  thy  basket,  and  thy  kneading  trough" 


250  PRINCIPLES   OF 

(Deut.  xxviii,  5).  "  Ye  cannot  drink  the  cup  of  the  Lord  and  the 
cup  of  demons,  ye  cannot  partake  of  the  table  of  the  Lord  and  of  the 
table  of  demons  "  (1  Cor.  x,  21).  Here  table,  basket,  kneading -troiujh, 
and  cup  are  used  for  that  which  they  contained,  or  for  which  they 
were  used.  The  following  examples  illustrate  how  the  abstract  is 
used  for  the  concrete:  "He  shall  justify  the  circumcision  by  faith, 
and  the  uncircuracision  through  faith"  (Rom.  iii,  30).  Here  the 
word  circumcision  designates  the  Jews,  and  uncircumcision  the 
Gentiles.  In  Rom.  xi,  7,  the  word  election  is  used  for  the  aggre- 
gate of  those  who  composed  the  "  remnant  according  to  the  elec- 
tion of  grace  "  (verse  5),  the  elect  portion  of  Israel.  And  Paul  tells 
the  Ephesians  (v,  8)  with  great  force  of  language :  "  Ye  were  once 
<larkness,  but  now  lig"r}t  in  the  Lord." 

There  is  another  use  of  this  figure  which  may  be  called  metonymy 
.   of  the  sign  and  the  thing  signified.     Thus  Isa.  xxii,  22: 

Metonymy     of  »  ,  „      ,        •■  /•    t-w      •  i  i  • 

sign  and  thing  "  I  Will  put  the  key  of  the  house  of  David  upon  his 
signined.  shoulder,  and  he  shall  open,  and  no  one  shutting,  and 

he  shall  shut,  and  no  one  opening."  Here  key  is  used  as  the  sign 
of  control  over  the  house,  of  power  to  open  or  close  the  doors  when- 
over  one  pleases;  and  the  putting  the  key  upon  the  shoulder  denotes 
that  the  power,  symbolized  by  the  key,  will  be  a  heavy  burden  on 
him  who  exercises  it.  Compare  Matt,  xvi,  19.  So  again  diadem 
and  croicn  are  used  in  Ezek.  xxi,  26,  for  regal  dignity  and  power, 
and  sceptre  in  Gen.  xlix,  10,  and  Zech,  x,  11,  for  kingly  dominion. 
In  Isaiah's  glowing  picture  of  the  Messianic  era  (ii,  4)  he  describes 
the  utter  cessation  of  national  strife  and  warfare  by  the  significant 
Avords,  "  They  shall  beat  their  swords  into  ploughshares,  and  their 
spears  into  pruninghooks."  In  Ezek.  vii,  27,  we  have  an  example 
of  the  use  of  the  thing  signified  for  the  sign:  "The  prince  shall  be 
clothed  with  desolation;"  that  is,  arrayed  in  the  garments  or  signs 
of  desolation. 

Another  kind  of  trope,  quite  similar  in  character  to  metonymy,  is 
that  by  which  the  whole  is  put  for  a  part,  or  a  part  for 

fivnGcdocliG.  "  X  1         '  1 

the  whole;  a  genus  for  a  species,  or  a  species  for  a  genus; 
the  singular  for  tlie  plural,  and  the  plural  for  the  singular.  This 
is  called  Synecdoche,  from  the  Greek  avv,  tcith,  and  eKdt:xoiJ.ai,  to  re- 
■cci'ye/'rom,  which  conveys  the  general  idea  of  receiving  and  associating 
one  tiling  along  with  another.  Thus  "  all  the  world  "  is  used  in  Luke 
ii,  1,  for  tlie  Roman  Empire;  and  in  Matt,  xii,  40,  three  days  and 
three  nights  are  used  for  only  part  of  that  time.  The  soul  is  often 
named  wlien  the  whole  man  or  person  is  intended;  as,  "  We  Avere 
in  all  in  the  ship  two  hundred  threescore  and  sixteen  souls  (Acts 
XX vii,  37),     Tlie  singular  of  dai/  is  used  by  synecdoche  for  days  or 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  251 

period  in  such  passages  as  Eccles.  xii,  3:  "In  the  day  when  the 
keepers  of  the  house  tremble."  The  singular  of  stork,  turtle,  crane, 
and  swallow  is  used  in  Jer.  viii,  7,  as  the  representative  of  the  whole 
class  to  which  each  belongs.  Jephthah  is  said  to  have  been  "  buried 
in  the  cities  of  Gilead  "  (Judg.  xii,  V),  where,  of  course,  only  one  of 
those  cities  is  intended.  In  Psa.  xlvi,  9,  the  Lord  is  represented  as 
"causing  wars  to  cease  unto  the  extremity  of  the  land;  bow  he  will 
shiver,  and  cut  in  pieces  spear;  war  chariots  he  will  burn  in  the 
tire."  Here,  by  specifying  bow,  spear,  and  chariots,  the  Psalmist 
doubtless  designed  to  represent  Jehovah's  triumph  as  an  utter  de- 
struction of  all  implements  of  war.  In  Deut.  xxxii,  41,  the  flashing 
gleam  of  the  sword  is  put  for  its  edge:  "If  I  sharpen  the  lightning 
of  my  sword,  and  my  hand  lay  hold  on  judgr  ant." 

We  have  called  attention,  in  the  earlier  part  of  this  work,  to  the 
tendency  of  the   Hebrew   mind  to  form   and   express 

.    .  -  •  ,•      1  Personification. 

Vivid  conceptions  of  the  external  world.'  Inanimate 
objects  were  spoken  of  as  if  instinct  with  life.  And  this  tendency 
is  noticeable  in  all  languages,  and  occasions  the  figure  of  speech 
called  Personification.^  It  is  so  common  a  feature  of  language  that 
it  often  occurs  in  the  most  ordinary  conversation;  but  it  is  more 
especially  suited  to  the  language  of  imagination  and  passion,  and 
appears  most  frequently  in  the  poetical  parts  of  Scripture.  The 
statement  in  Kum.  xvi,  32,  that  "the  earth  opened  her  mouth  and 
swallowed  "  Korah  and  his  associates,  is  an  instance  of  personifica- 
tion, the  like  of  which  often  occurs  in  prose  narration.  More  strik- 
ing is  the  language  of  Matt,  vi,  34:  "Be  not  therefore  anxious  for 
the  morrow,  for  the  morrow  will  be  anxious  for  itself."  Here  the 
morrow  itself  is  pictured  before  us  as  a  living  person,  pressed  by 
care  and  anxiety.  But  the  more  forcible  instances  of  i)ersonifica- 
tion  are  found  in  such  passages  as  Psa.  cxiv,  3,  4:  "The  sea  saw 
and  fled;  the  Jordan  was  turned  backward.  The  mountains  leaped 
like  rams;  hills  like  the  sons  of  the  flock."  Or,  again,  in  Hab. 
iii,  10:  "Mountains  saw  thee,  they  writhe;  a  flood  of  waters  passed 
over;  the  deep  gave  his  voice;  on  high  his  hands  he  lifted."  Here 
mountains,  hills,  rivers,  and  sea,  are  introduced  as  things  of  life. 
They  are  assumed  to  have  self-conscious  powers  of  thought,  feel- 
ing, and  locomotion,  and  yet  it  is  all  the  emotional  language  of  im- 
agination and  poetic  fervour. 

'  See  above,  i)p.  8fi,  102. 

'  The  more  technical  name  is  Prosopopoeia,  from  the  Greek  TTpoauirov,  face,  or  per- 
son, and  TToieu,  to  make  ;  and,  accordingly,  means  to  give  personal  form  or  character 
to  an  ohject.  Prosnpopceia  is  held  by  some  to  be  a  term  of  more  extensive  applica- 
tion tlian  personification. 


252  PRINCIPLES   OF 

Apostrophe  is  a  figure  closely  allied  to  personification.  The 
name  is  derived  from  the  Greek  and,  from,  and  arpe^w, 
to  turn,  and  denotes  especially  the  turning  of  a  speaker 
away  from  his  immediate  hearers,  and  addressing  an  absent  and 
imaginary  person  or  thing.  When  the  address  is  to  an  inanimate 
object,  the  figures  of  personification  and  apostrophe  combine  in  one 
and  the  same  passage.  So,  in  connexion  with  the  passage  above 
cited  from  Psa.  cxiv.  After  personifying  the  sea,  the  Jordan,  and 
the  mountains,  the  psalmist  suddenly  turns  in  direct  address  to 
them,  and  says:  *' What  is  the  matter  with  thee,  O  thou  sea,  that 
thou  fleest  ?  Thou  Jordan,  that  thou  art  turning  backward  ?  Ye 
mountains,  that  ye  leap  like  rams;  ye  hills,  like  the  sons  of  the 
flock?"  The  following  apostrophe  is  peculiarly  impressive  by  the 
force  of  its  imagery.  "  O,  Sword  of  Jehovah  !  How  long  Avilt 
thou  not  be  quiet?  Gather  thyself  to  thy  sheath;  be  at  rest  and 
be  dumb"  (Jer.  xlvii,  6).  But  apostrophe  proper  is  an  address  to 
some  absent  person  either  living  or  dead;  as  when  David  laments 
for  the  dead  Absalom  (2  Sam.  xviii,  33),  and,  as  if  the  departed 
soul  were  present  to  hear,  exclaims:  "My  son-  Absalom!  my  son, 
my  son  Absalom  !  Would  that  I  had  died  in  thy  stead,  O  Absa- 
lom, my  son,  my  son  ! "  The  apostrophe  to  the  fallen  king  of 
Babylon,  in  Isa.  xiv,  9-20,  is  one  of  the  boldest  and  sublimest  ex- 
amples of  the  kind  in  any  language.  Similar  instances  of  bold  and 
impassioned  address  abound  in  the  Hebrew  prophets,  and,  as  we 
have  seen,  the  oriental  mind  was  notably  given  to  express  thoughts 
and  feelings  in  this  emotional  style. 

Interrogatory  forms  of  expression  are  often  the  strongest  possible 

way  of  enunciating  important  truths.     As  Avhen  it  is 
Interrogation.  .''  •      tt  i      •  •  -,  ■,  »  i 

written  ni  Heb.  i,  14,  concerning  the  angels:  "Are  they 

not  all  ministering  si)irits  sent  forth  into  service  for  the  sake  of 
those  who  are  to  inherit  salvation?"  Here  the  doctrine  of  the 
ministry  of  angels  in  such  a  noble  service  is  by  implication  as- 
sumed as  an  undisputed  belief.  The  interrogatories  in  Rom.  viii, 
33-35,  afford  a  most  impressive  style  of  setting  forth  the  triumph 
of  believers  in  the  blessed  provisions  of  redemption:  "Who  shall 
bring  charge  against  God's  elect  ones?  Shall  God  who  justifies? 
Who  is  he  that  is  condemning?  Is  it  Christ  Jesus  that  died,  but, 
rather,  that  was  raised  from  the  dead,  who  is  at  the  right  hand  of 
God,  who  also  intercedes  for  us  ?  AVho  shall  separate  us  from  the 
love  of  Christ?  Shall  tribulation,  or  anguish,  or  persecution,  or 
famine,  or  nakedness,  or  peril,  or  sword?  Even  as  it  is  written, 
For  thy  sake  we  are  killed  all  the  day;  we  Avere  accounted  as  sheep 
of  slaugliter.     But  in  all  tiiese  things  we  more  than  conquer  through 


BIBLICAL    HEKMENEUTICS.  253 

him  that  loved  us."  '  Very  frequent  and  conspicuous  also  are  the 
interrogatory  forms  of  speech  in  the  Book  of  Job.  "  Knowest  thou 
this  of  old,  from  the  placing  of  Adam  on  the  earth,  that  the  tri- 
umjjh  of  the  wicked  is  short,  and  the  joy  of  the  profane  for  a 
moment  ?"(xx,  4).  "The  secret  of  Eloah  canst  thou  find?  Or 
canst  thou  find  out  Shaddai  to  perfection?"  (xi,  7).  Jehovah's  an- 
swer out  of  the  whirlwind  (chaps,  xxxviii-xli)  is  very  largely  in 
this  form. 

Hyperbole  is  a  rhetorical  figure  which  consists  in  exaggeration, 
or  mag-nifvinsr  an  obiect  beyond  reality.    It  has  its  nat- 

...  .  .  Hyperbole. 

ural  origin  in  the  tendency  of  youthful  and  imaginative 
minds  to  portray  facts  in  the  liveliest  colours.  An  ardent  imagina- 
tion would  very  naturally  describe  the  appearance  of  the  many 
camps  of  the  Midianites  and  Amalekites  as  in  Judg.  vii,  12:  "Lying 
in  the  valley  like  grasslioppers  for  multitude;  and  as  to  their 
camels,  no  number,  like  the  sand  which  is  upon  the  shore  of  the 
sea  for  multitude."  So  the  emotion  of  David  prompts  him  to  speak 
of  Saul  and  Jonathan  as  swifter  than  eagles  and  stronger  than 
lions  (2  Sam.  i,  23).  Other  scriptural  examples  of  this  figure  are 
the  following:  "  All  night  I  make  my  bed  to  swim;  with  my  tears 
I  dissolve  my  couch  "  (Psa.  vi,  6).  "  Would  that  my  head  were 
waters  and  my  eyes  a  fountain  of  tears;  and  I  would  weep  day  and 
night  the  slain  of  the  daughter  of  my  people"  (Jer.  ix,  1).  "There 
are  also  many  other  thing*  which  Jesus  did,  which  things,  if  writ- 
ten every  one,  I  suppose  that  the  world  itself  would  not  contain 
the  books  that  should  be  written"  (John  xxi,  25).  Such  exagger- 
ated expressions,  when  not  overdone,  or  occurring  too  frequently, 
strike  the  attention  and  make  an  agreeable  impression  on  the  mind. 
Another  peculiar  form  of  speech,  deserving  a  passing  notice 
here,  is  irony,  by  which  a  speaker  or  writer  says  the 
very  opposite  of  what  he  intends.  Elijah's  language  to 
the  Baal  worshippers  (1  Kings  xviii,  27)  is  an  example  of  most 
effective  irony.  Another  example  is  Job  xii,  1 :  "  True  it  is  that 
ye  are  the  people,  and  with  you  wisdom  will  die  ! "  In  1  Cor. 
iv,  8,  Paul  indulges  in  the  following  ironical  vein:  "Already  ye 
are  filled;  already  ye  are  become  rich;  without  us  ye  have  reigned; 
and  I  would  indeed  that  ye  did  reign,  that  we  also  might  reign  ^\•ith 
you."     On  this  passage  Meyer  remarks:  "The  discourse,  already  in 

'  The  interrogative  construction  of  this  passage  given  above  is  maintained  by  many 
of  the  best  interpreters  and  critics,  ancient  and  modern  (as  Augustine,  Ambrosiaster, 
Koppe,  Reiche,  Kollner,  Olshausen,  De  Wette,  Griesbach,  Lachmann,  Alford,  Web- 
ster, and  Jowett),  and  seems  to  us,  on  the  whole,  the  most  simple  and  satisfactory. 
But  see  other  constructions  advocated  in  Meyer  and  Lange. 


254  PRINCIPLES   OF 

verse  7,  roused  to  a  lively  pitch,  becomes  now  bitterly  ironical,  heap- 
ing stroke  on  stroke,  even  as  the  proud  Corinthians,  with  their  par- 
tisan conduct,  needed  an  admonition  {yovdeoia,  ver.  14)  to  teach  them 
humility."  The  designation  of  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver,  in  Zcch. 
xi,  1-3,  as  "a  glorious  price,"  is  an  example  of  sarcasm.  Words  of 
derision  and  scorn,  like  those  of  the  soldiers  in  Matt,  xxvii,  30: 
*'  Hail.  KinsT  of  the  Jews  !  "  and  those  of  the  chief  priests  and  sci-ibes 
in  ]\Iark  xv,  32:  "Let  the  Christ,  the  King  of  Israel,  now  come 
down  from  the  cross,  that  we  may  see  and  believe,"  are  not  proper 
examples  of  irony,  but  of  malignant  mockery. 


■  »•»  ■ 


CHAPTER   XL 

SIMILE    AND    METAPHOR. 

Simile. 

When  a  formal  comparison  is  made  between  two  different  objects, 
Simile  defined  SO  as  to  impress  t'he  mind  with  some  resemblance  or 
and  illustrated,  likeness,  the  figure  is  called  a  simile.  A  beautiful 
example  is  found  in  Isa.  Iv,  10,  11:  "For  as  the  rain  and  the  snow 
come  down  from  the  heavens,  and  thither  do  not  return,  but  water 
the  land,  and  cause  it  to  bear  and  to  sprout,  and  it  gives  seed  to 
the  sower  and  bread  to  the  eater:  so  shall  my  word  be  which  goes 
forth  out  of  my  mouth;  it  shall  not  return  to  me  empty,  but  do  that 
which  I  desired,  and  be  successful  in  Avhat  I  sent  it."  The  apt  and 
varied  allusions  of  this  passage  set  forth  the  beneficial  efficacy  of 
God's  word  in  a  most  ifhpressive  style.  "The  images* chosen,"  ob- 
serves Delitzsch,  "  are  rich  with  allusions.  As  snow  and  rain  are 
the  mediate  cause  of  growth,  and  thus  also  of  the  enjoyment  of 
what  is  harvested,  so  also  by  the  word  of  God  the  ground  and  soil 
of  the  human  heart  is  softened,  refreshed,  and  made  fertile  and 
vegetative,  and  this  word  gives  the  prophet,  who  is  like  the  sower, 
the  seed  which  he  scatters,  and  it  brings  with  it  bread  that  nour- 
ishes the  soul;  for  every  word  that  proceeds  from  the  mouth  of  God 
is  bread  "  (Deut.  viii,  3).'  Another  illustration  of  the  word  of  God 
appears  in  Jer.  xxiii,  29:  "Is  not  my  word  even  as  the  fire,  saith 
Jehovah,  and  as  a  hammer  that  breaks  a  rock  in  pieces  ? "  Here 
are  portrayed  the  fury  and  force  of  the  divine  word  against  false 

'  Biblical  Commenturv  on  Isaiiili,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL    HERJLENEUTICS.  255 

prophets.  It  is  a  word  of  judgment  that  burns  and  smites  the  sin- 
ful offender  unto  utter  ruin,  and  the  intensity  of  its  power  is  en- 
hanced by  the  double  simile. 

The  tendency  of  the  Hebrew  writers  to  crowd  several  similes  to- 
gether is  noticeable,  and  this  may  be  in  part  accounted   „ 

°  '  .  „,  .  Crowding      of 

for  by  the  nature  of  Hebrew  parallelism.  1  hus  in  Isa.  simUes  togeth- 
i,  8 :  "  The  daughter  of  Zion  is  left  as  a  booth  in  a  vine-  ^^' 
yard;  as  a  night-lodge  in  a  field  of  cucumbers;  as  a  city  besieged." 
And  again  in  verse  30:  "  Ye  shall  be  as  an  oak  withering  in  foliage, 
and  as  a  garden  to  which  there  is  no  water."  And  in  xxix,  8:  "It 
shall  be  as  when  the  hungry  dreams,  and  lo,  he  is  eating,  and  he 
awakes,  and  his  soul  is  empty ;  and  as  when  the  thirsty  dreams,  and 
lo,  he  is  drinking,  and  he  awakes,  and  lo,  he  is  faint,  and  his  soul  is 
eagerly  longing:  so  shall  be  the  multitude  of  all  the  nations  that 
are  warring  against  Mount  Zion."  But  though  the  figures  are  thus 
multiplied,  they  have  a  natural  afiinity,  and  are  not  open  to  the 
cliarge  of  being  mixed  or  confused. 

Similes  are  of  frequent  occurrence  in  the  Scriptures,  and  being 
designed  to  illustrate  an  author's  meaning,  they  involve  gimiies  seif-m- 
no  difficulties  of  interpretation.  When  the  Psalmist  terpreting. 
says:  "I  am  like  a  pelican  of  the  wilderness;  I  have  become  as  an 
owl  of  desert  places;  I  watch  and  am  become  as  a  solitary  s2:)arrow 
on  a  roof  "  (Psa.  cii,  6),  he  conveys  a  vivid  picture  of  his  utter 
loneliness.  An  image  of  gracefulness  and  beauty  is  i^resented  by 
the  language  of  Cant,  ii,  9:  "My  beloved  is  like  a  roe,  or  a  young 
fawn."  Compare  verse  16,  and  chapter  iv,  1-5.  Ezekiel  (xxxii,  2) 
compares  Pharaoh  to  a  young  lion  of  the  nations,  and  a  dragon 
(crocodile)  in  the  seas.  It  is  said  in  Matt,  xvii,  2,  that  when  Jesus 
became  transfigured  "his  face  did  shine  as  the  sun,  and  his  gar- 
ments became  white  as  the  light."  In  Matt,  xxviii,  3,  it  is  said 
of  the  angel  who  rolled  the  stone  from  the  sepulchre,  that  "his 
appearance  was  as  lightning,  and  his  raiment  white  as  snow."  In 
Rom.  xii,  4,  the  apostle  illustrates  the  unity  of  the  Church  and  the 
diversity  of  its  individual  ministers  by  the  following  comparison: 
"  Even  as  in  one  body  we  have  many  members,  and  all  the  mem- 
bers have  not  the  same  work:  so  we,  who  are  many,  are  one  body 
in  Christ,  and  severally  members  one  of  another."  Compare  also 
1  Cor.  xii,  12.  In  all  these  and  other  instances  the  comparison  is 
self-interpreting,  and  the  main  thought  is  intensified  by  the  imagery. 

A  fine  example  of  simile  is  that  at  the  close  of  the  sermon  on  the 
mount  (Matt,  vii,  24-27):  "Every  one  therefore  who  hears  these 
words  of  mine,  and  does  them,  shall  be  likened  unto  a  Avise  man, 
who  built  his  house  upon  the  rock."     Whether  we  here  take  the 


'356  PRINCIPLES    OF 

<)ij,oicod7ioeTai,  shall  he  likened,  as  a  prediction  of  what  will  take  place 
in  the  final  judgraent — I  will  then  make  him  like;  show  as  a  matter 
of  fact  that  he  is  like  (Tholuck,  Meyer),  or  as  simply  the  predi- 
cate of  formal  comparison  (the  future  tense  merely  contemplating 
future  cases  as  they  shall  arise),  the  similitude  is  in  either  case  the 
same.  We  have  on  the  one  hand  the  figure  of  a  house  based  upon 
the  immovable  rock,  which  neither  storm  nor  flood  can  shake;  on 
the  other  of  a  house  based  upon  the  shifting  sand,  and  unable  to 
resist  the  violence  of  winds  and  floods.  The  similitude,  thus  formal- 
ly developed,  becomes,  in  fact,  a  parable,  and  the  mention  of  rains, 
floods,  and  winds  implies  that  the  house  is  to  be  tested  at  roof, 
foundation,  and  sides — top,  bottom,  and  middle.  But  we  should 
not,  like  the  mystics,  seek  to  find  some  special  and  distinct  form  of 
temptation  in  these  three  words.  The  grand  similitude  sets  forth 
impressively  the  certain  future  of  those  who  hear  and  obey  the 
words  of  Jesus,  and  also  of  those  who  hear  and  refuse  to  obey. 
Compare  with  this  similitude  the  allegory  in  Ezek.  xiii,  11-15. 
Blair  traces  the  pleasure  we  take  in  comparisons  of  this  kind  to 

^    three   different   sources.       "  First,    from    the    pleasure 
Pleasures     af-  ,  c  •     t  i 

forded  by  sim-  which  nature  has  annexed  to  that  act  of  the  mind  by 

^^^'  which  we  compare  two  objects  together,  trace  resem- 

l)lances  among  those  that  are  different,  and  differences  among  those 
that  resemble  each  other;  a  pleasure,  the  final  cause  of  which  is  to 
prompt  us  to  remark  and  observe,  and  thereby  to  make  us  advance 
in  useful  knowledge.  This  operation  of  the  mind  is  naturally  and 
universally  agreeable,  as  appears  from  the  delight  which  even  chil- 
dren have  in  comparing  things  together,  as  soon  as  they  are  capa- 
ble of  attending  to  the  objects  that  surround  them.  Secondly,  the 
pleasure  of  comparison  arises  from  the  illustration  which  the  simile 
employed  gives  to  the  principal  object;  from  the  clearer  view  of  it 
which  it  presents,  or  the  stronger  impression  of  it  which  it  stamps 
upon  the  mind.  And,  thirdly,  it  arises  from  the  introduction  of  a 
new,  and  commonly  a  splendid  object,  associated  to  the  principal 
one  of  which  Ave  treat;  and  from  the  agreeable  picture  which  that 
object  presents  to  the  fancy;  new  scenes  being  thereby  brought 
into  view,  which,  without  the  assistance  of  this  figure,  we  could  not 
have  enjoyed."  ' 

There  is,  common  to  all  languages,  a  class  of  illustrations,  which 
miirht   be    appropriately   called   assumed   comparisons. 

Assumed  com-  -^  i  i       r  j  ^  _  _      _  i 

parisi.ns  or  ii-  They  are  not,  strictly  speaking,  either  similes,  or  meta- 
lustrations.  pj^ors,  Or  parables,  or  allegories,  and  yet  they  include 
some  elements  of  them  all.     A   fact   or   figure  is  introduced    for 

'  Lectures  on  Rhetoric,  lecture  xvil. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  257 

tlie  sake  of  illustration,  and  yet  no  formal  words  of  comparison  are 
used.  But  the  reader  or  hearer  perceives  at  once  that  a  compari- 
son is  assumed.  Sometimes  such  assumed  comparisons  follow  a 
regular  simile.  In  2  Tim.  ii,  3,  we  read:  "Partake  thou  in  hard- 
shii)  as  a  good  soldier  of  Christ  Jesus."  But  immediately  after 
these  words,  and  keeping  the  figure  thus  introduced  in  his  mind, 
the  apostle  adds:  "No  one  on  service  as  a  soldier  entangles  himself 
with  the  affairs  of  life;  in  order  that  he  may  please  him  who  en- 
listed him  as  a  soldier."  Here  is  no  figure  of  speech,  but  the  plain 
statement  of  a  fact  fully  recognized  in  military  service.  But  fol- 
lowing the  simile  of  verse  3,  it  is  evidently  intended  as  a  further 
illustration,  and  Timothy  is  left  to  make  his  own  application  of  it. 
And  then  follow  two  other  illustrations,  which  it  is  also  assumed 
the  reader  will  apply  for  himself.  "And  if  also  any  one  contend 
as  an  athlete,  he  is  not  crowned  if  he  did  not  lawfully  contend.  The 
labouring  husbandman  must  first  partake  of  the  fruits."  These 
are  plain,  literal  statements,  but  a  comparison  is  tacitly  assumed, 
and  Timothy  could  not  fail  to  make  the  proper  application.  The 
true  minister's  close  devotion  to  his  proper  work,  his  cordial  sub- 
mission, and  conformity  to  lawful  authority  and  order,  and  his 
laborious  activity,  are  the  points  especially  emphasized  by  these 
respective  illustrations.  So,  again,  in  verses  20  and  21  of  the  same 
chapter:  "In  a  great  house  there  are  not  only  vessels  golden  and 
silver,  but  also  wooden  and  earthen  ones,  and  some  Literal  state- 
unto  honovir  and  some  unto  dishonour."  Here  is  a  !?|f "f' „!!"VlS" 
simple  statement  of  facts  intended  for  an  illustration,  son. 
but  not  presented  as  a  simile.  It  is  suggested  by  the  metaphor  in 
the  preceding  verse,  in  which  the  Lord's  own  chosen,  the  pure  who 
confess  his  name,  are  represented  as  the  firm  foundation  laid  by 
God,  a  beautifully  inscribed  substructure,  which,  however,  is  to  be 
gradually  builded  upon  until  the  edifice  becomes  complete.'  Its 
real  character  and  purport  are  as  if  the  apostle  had  said:  "And 
now,  for  illustration,  consider  how,  in  a  great  house,"  etc.  What 
he  says  of  this  house  is,  in  itself,  no  figure,  but  a  literal  statement 
of  what  was  commonly  found  in  any  exterisive  building;  but  in 
verse  21  he  makes  his  owm  application  thus:  "If,  therefore,  any 
one  purify  himself  from  these  (persons  like  the  troublesome  error- 
ists,  as  the  babblers,  Hynienoeus,  etc.,  verses  16,  17,  considered  as 
vessels  unto  dishonour),  he  shall  be  as  a  vessel  unto  honour,  sancti- 
fied, useful  to  the  Master,  unto  every  good  work  prepared." 

A  similar  example  of  extended  illustration  appears  in  Matt,  vii; 
15-20:  "Beware  of  the  false  prophets  who  come  to  you  in  sheep's 
'  Compare  what  is  said  on  Teter,  the  living  stone,  pp.  226-229. 
17 


258  PRINCIPLES   OP 

clothing,  but  inwardly  tliey  are  ravenous  wolves."  Here  is  a  bold, 
strong  metaphor,  obliging  us  to  think  of  the  false  teacher  as  a  wolf 
covered  over  and  concealed  from  outward  view  by  the  skin  of  a 
sheep.  But  the  next  verse  introduces  another  figure  entirely: 
"From  their  fruits  ye  will  know  them;"  and  then  to  make  the 
figure  plainer,  our  Lord  asks:  "Do  they  gather  grapes  from  thorns, 
or  figs  from  thistles  ?  "  The  question  demands  a  negative  answer, 
and  is  itself  an  emphatic  way  of  making  such  answer.  Thereupon 
he  proceeds,  using  the  formula  of  comparison :  "  So  every  good  tree 
produces  good  fruit,  and  the  bad  tree  produces  bad  fruit; "  and 
then,  dropping  formal  comparison,  he  adds:  "A  good  tree  cannot 
bring  forth  bad  fruit,  nor  can  a  bad  tree  produce  good  fruit. 
Every  tree  that  does  not  produce  good  fruit  is  cut  down  and  cast 
into  fire.  Therefore  (in  view  of  these  well-known  facts,  adduced 
as  illustrations,  I  repeat  the  statement  made  a  moment  ago,  verse 
16),  from  their  fruits  ye  will  know  them."  It  will  be  shown  in  a 
subsequent  chapter  how  all  true  parables  are  essentially  similes,  but 
all  similes  are  not  parables.  The  examples  of  assumed  comparison, 
given  above,  though  distinguished  from  both  simile  and  parable 
proper,  contain  essential  elements  of  both. 

Metaphor. 

Metaphor  is  an  implied  comparison,  and  is  of  much  more  frequent 
„  ,    ^       ,      occurrence  in  all  languages  than  simile.     It  differs  from 

Metaphor     <\e-  _  .  . 

fined  iiiiii  iiius-  the  latter  in  being  a  briefer  and  more  pungent  form  of 
^^'^^^' '  expression,    and  in    turning   words   from  their   literal 

meaning  to  a  new  and  striking  use.  The  passaore  in  IIos,  xiii,  8: 
"I  will  devour  them  like  a  lion,"  is  a  simile  or  formal  comparison; 
but  Gen.  xlix,  9:  "A  lion's  whelp  is  Judah,"  is  a  metaphor.  We 
may  compare  something  to  the  savage  strength  and  rapacity  of  a 
lion,  or  the  swift  flight  of  an  eagle,  or  the  brightness  of  the  sun,  or 
the  beauty  of  a  rose,  and  in  each  case  we  use  the  words  in  their 
literal  sense.  But  Miicn  we  say,  Judah  is  a  lion,  Jonathan  was  an 
eagle,  Jehovah  is  a  sun,  my  beloved  one  is  a  rose,  we  perceive  at 
once  that  the  words  lion,  eagle,  etc.,  are  not  used  literally,  but  only 
some  notable  quality  or  characteristic  of  these  creatures  is  intended. 
Hence  metaphor,  as  the  name  denotes  (Greek,  fxerafpe^K.),  to  caiTi/ 
over,  to  transfer),  is  that  figure  of  speech  in  which  the  sense  of  one 
word  is  transferred  to  another.  This  process  of  using  Avords  in  new 
constructions  is  constantly  going  on,  and,  as  Ave  have  seen  in  former 
chapters,  the  tropical  sense  of  many  AVords  becomes  at  length  the 
only  one  in  use.  Every  language  is,  therefore,  to  a  great  extent, 
a  dictionary  of  faded  metaphors. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  259 

The  sources  from  which  scriptural  metaphors  are  drawn  are  to 
be  looked  for  chiefly  in  the  natural  scenery  of  the  lands  of  the 
Bible,  the  customs  and  antiquities  of  the  Orient,  and  the  ritual 
worship  of  the  Hebrews.'  In  Jer.  ii,  13,  we  have  two  very  expres- 
sive metaphors :  "My  people  have  committed  two  evils:  Examples  of 
they  have  forsaken  me,  a  fountain  of  living  waters,  to   metaphor  drawn 

from        nitiir'il 

hew  for  themselves  cisterns,  broken  cisterns,  that  can  scenery. 
hold  no  water."  A  fountain  of  living  waters,  especially  in  such  a 
land  as  Palestine,  is  of  inestimable  worth ;  far  more  valuable  than 
any  artificial  well  or  cistern,  that  can  at  best  only  catch  and  hold 
rain  water,  and  is  liable  to  become  broken  and  lose  its  contents. 
What  insane  folly  for  a  man  to  forsake  a  living  fountain  to  hew  for 
himself  an  uncertain  cistern!  The  ingratitude  and  apostasy  of 
Israel  are  strikingly  characterized  by  the  first  figure,  and  their  self- 
sufficiency  by  t-he  second. 

In  Job  ix,  6,  a  violent  earthquake  is  represented  as  Jehovah 
"  causing  the  land  to  move  from  her  place,  and  making  her  columns 
tremble."  The  whole  land  affected  by  the  eartliquake  shock  is 
conceived  as  a  building,  heaved  out  of  place,  and  all  her  pillars  or 
columnar  supports  trembling  and  tottering  to  their  fall.  In  chapter 
xxvi,  8,  the  holding  of  the  rain  in  the  heavens  is  pictured  as  God 
"binding  up  the  waters  in  his  dark  cloud  (ny),  and  the  cloud  (py, 
cloud-covering)  is  not  rent  under  them."  The  clouds  are  conceived 
as  a  great  slieet  or  bag,  strong  enough  to  hold  the  immense  weight 
of  waters.  In  Deut.  xxxii,  40,  Jehovah  is  represented  as  saying : 
"  For  I  will  lift  up  to  heaven  my  hand,  and  say,  living  am  I  for- 
ever." Here  the  allusion  is  to  the  ancient  custom  of  Ancient  cus- 
lifting  up  the  hand  to  heaven  in  the  act  of  making  a  toais. 
solemn  oath.  In  verse  42  we  have  these  further  images :  "  I  will 
make  my  arrows  drunk  with  blood,  and  my  sword  shall  devour 
flesh."  By  these  metaphors  arrows  are  personified  as  living  things, 
intoxicated  with  drinking  the  blood  of  Jehovah's  slaughtered  foes, 
and  the  sword,  as  a  ravenous  beast  of  prey,  devouring  their  flesh. 
Many  similar  examples  exhibit  at  one  and  the  same  time  the  Old 
Testament  anthropomorphisms,^  together  with  personification  and 
metaphor. 

The  following  strong  metaphors  have  their  basis  in  well-known 
habits  of  animals :  "  Issachar  is  an  ass  of  bone,  lying  jyjgtaphoricai  ai- 
down  between  the  double  fold"  (Gen.  xlix,  14).  He  lusionstotiieha- 
loves  rest,  like  a  beast  of  burden,  especially  like  the 
strong,  bony  ass,  that  seeks  repose  between  the  slieepfolds.  "Naph- 
tali  is  a  hind  sent  forth,  the  giver  of  sayings  of  beauty"  (Gen. 
'  Compare  above,  p.  246.  *  See  above,  p.  103. 


260  PRINCIPLES   OP 

xlix,  21),  The  allusion  here  is  specially  to  the  elegance  and  beauty 
ot'  the  hind,  bounding  away  gracefully  in  his  freedom,  and  denotes 
in  the  tribe  of  Naphtali  a  taste  for  sayings  of  beauty,  such  as  ele- 
gant songs  and  proverbs.  As  the  neighbouring  tribe  of  Zebulon 
produced  ready  writers  (Judges  v,  14),  so,  probably,  Naphtali  be- 
came noted  for  elegant  speakers.  "Benjamin  is  a  wolf;  he  shall 
rend"  (Gen,  xlix,  27).  This  metaphor  fitingly  portrays  the  furious, 
warlike  character  of  the  Benjamites,  from  whom  sprang  an  Ehud 
and  a  Saul.  In  Zech.  vii,  11,  mention  is  made  of  those  who  "re- 
fused to  hearken,  and  gave  a  refractory  shoulder,"  that  is,  acte4 
like  a  refractory  heifer  or  ox  that  shakes  the  shoulder  and  refuses 
to  accept  the  yoke,  Comp.  Neh,  ix,  29  and  Hos.  iv,  16,  In  Num, 
xxiv,  21,  it  is  said  of  the  Kenites,  "  Enduring  is  thy  dwelling-place, 
and  set  in  the  rock  thy  nest,"  The  secure  dwellings  of  this  tribe  iu 
the  high  fastnesses  of  the  rocky  hills  are  conceived  as  the  nest  of 
the  eagle  in  the  towering  rock.  Comp.  Job  xxxix,  27;  Jer,  xlix,  16; 
Obad.  4 ;  Hab.  ii,  9.  • 

The  following  metaphors  are  based  upon  practices  appertaining 

to  the   worship  and  ritual  of  the  Hebrews.     "I  Avill 
Metaphors  ,     ^    ,      ,  t      -n  i     i  ^ 

based  on  He-    wash  my  palms  m  mnocency,  1  will  go  round  about  thy 

brew  ritual.  ^^^^^,^  q  Jehovah"  (Psa.  xxvi,  6).  Here  the  allusion  is 
to  the  practice  of  the  priests  who  were  required  to  wash  their  hands 
before  coming  near  the  altar  to  minister  (Exod.  xxx,  20).  The 
psalmist  expresses  his  purpose  to  conform  thoroughly  to  Jehovah's 
will ;  he  would,  so  to  speak,  offer  his  burnt-offeringsj  even  as  the 
priest  who  goes  about  the  altar  on  Avhich  his  sacrifice  is  to  be 
offered ;  and  in  doing  so,  he  would  be  careful  to  conform  to  every 
requirement.  In  Psa,  li,  7,  "Purify  me  with  hyssop,  and  I  shall 
become  clean,"  the  allusion  is  to  the  ceremonial  forms  of  purifying 
the  leper  (Lev.  xiv,  6,  7)  and  his  house  (verse  51),  and  the  person 
who  had  been  defiled  by  contact  with  a  dead  body  (Xum,  xix,  18, 19), 
So  also  the  well-known  usages  of  the  passover,  the  sacrifice  of  the 
lamb,  the  cai'eful  removal  of  all  leaven,  and  the  use  of  unleavened 
bread,  lie  at  the  basis  of  the  following  metaphorical  language: 
"  Purge  out  the  old  leaven,  that  ye  may  be  a  new  lump,  even  as  ye 
are  unleavened;  for  our  passover  also  has  been  sacrificed,  even 
Christ ;  wherefore,  let  us  keep  the  feast,  not  with  old  leaven,  nor 
with  the  leaven  of  malice  and  wickedness,  but  with  the  unleavened 
loaves  of  sincerity  and  truth"  (1  Cor,  v,  7,  8),  Here  the  metaphors 
are  continued  until  they  make  an  allegory. 

Sometimes  a  writer  or  speaker,  after  having  used  a  striking 
metaphor  goes  on  to  elaborate  its  imagery,  and,  by  so  doing,  con- 
structs an  allegory  ;  sometimes  he  introduces  a  number  and  variety 


4 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  381 

of  images  together,  or,  at  other  times,  laying  all  figure  aside,  he 
proceeds  with  plain  and  simple  language.  Thus,  in  the  j-jj^^j^^^j^j  ^ 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  Jesus  says :  "  Ye  are  the  salt  of  mixed  meta- 
the  earth"  (Matt,  v,  13).  It  is  not  difficult  to  grasp  at  p^°''^- 
once  the  comparison  here  implied.  "  The  earth,  the  living  world 
of  men,  is  like  a  piece  of  meat,  which  would  putrefy  but  that  the 
grace  of  the  Gospel  of  God,  like  salt,  arrests  the  decay  and  purifies 
and  preserves  it."  *  But  the  Lord  proceeds,  adhering  closely  to  tlie 
imagery  of  salt  and  its  power,  and  develops  his  figure  into  a  brief 
allegory :  "  But  if  the  salt  have  lost  its  savour,  wherewith  shall  it  be 
salted?"  Here  is  a  most  significant  query.  "The  apostles,  and  in 
their  degree  all  Christians,"  says  Whedon,  "are  the  substance  and 
body  of  that  salt.  They  are  the  substance  to  which  the  saltness 
inheres.  But  if  the  living  body  to  which  this  gracious  saltness  in- 
heres doth  lose  this  quality,  wherewith  shall  the  quality  be  restored? 
The  it  refers  to  the  solid  salt  which  has  lost  its  saltness  or  savour. 
What,  alas!  shall  ever  resalt  that  savourless  salt?  The  Christian 
is  the  solid  salt,.and  the  grace  of  God  is  his  saltness;  that  grace  is 
the  very  salt  of  the  salt.  This  solid  salt  is  intended  to  salt  the 
world  with;  but,  alas!  who  shall  salt  the  salt?"^  But  immediately 
after  this  elaborated  figure,  another  and  different  metaphor  is  in- 
troduced, and  carried  forward  with  still  greater  detail.  "Ye  are 
the  light  of  the  world.  A  city  set  on  a  mountain  cannot  be  hid ; 
nor  do  they  light  a  lamp  and  put  it  under  the  modius,  but  on  the 
stand,  and  it  shines  for  all  that  are  in  the  house.  Even  so  let  your 
light  shine"  (Matt,  v,  14-16).  Here  a  variety  of  images  is  pre- 
sented to  the  mind ;  a  light,  a  city  on  a  mountain,  a  lamp,  a  lamp- 
stand,  and  a  Roman  modius  or  peck  measure.  But  through  all 
these  varying  images  runs  the  main  figure  of  a  light  designed  to 
send  its  rays  afar,  and  illumine  all  within  its  range.  A  metaphor 
thus  extended  always  becomes,  strictly  speaking,  an  allegory.  In 
Matt,  vii,  7,  we  have  three  metaphors  introduced  in  a  single  verse. 
"  Ask  and  it  shall  be  given  you ;  seek  and  ye  shall  find ;  knock  and 
it  shall  be  opened  unto  you."  First,  we  have  the  image  of  a  sup- 
pliant, making  a  request  before  a  superior;  next,  of  one  who  is  in 
search  for  some  goodly  pearl  or  treasure  (comp.  Matt,  xiii,  45,  46) ; 
and,  finally,  of  one  who  is  knocking  at  a  door  for  admission.  The 
three  figures  are  so  well  related  that  they  produce  no  confusion,  but 
rather  serve  to  strengthen  one  another.  So  Paul  uses  with  good 
effect  a  twofold  metaphor  in  Eph.  iii,  18,  where  lie  j)rays  "that 
Christ  may  dwell  in  your  hearts  through  faith,  being  roo^ec?  and 
grounded  in  love."  Here  is  the  figure  of  a  tree  striking  its  roots 
'  Whedon,  Commentary,  in  loco.         .  ^  IljiJ. 


262  PRINCIPLES   OP 

into  the  soil,  and  of  a  building  based  upon  a  deep  and  strong 
foundation.'  But  these  figures  are  accompanied  both  before  and 
after  with  a  style  of  language  of  the  most  simple  and  practical 
character,  and  not  designed  to  elaborate  or  even  adhere  to  the 
imagery  suggested  by  the  metaphors. 

Sometimes  the  salient  point  of  allusion  in  a  metaphor  may  be  a 
matter  of  doubt  or  uncertainty.     The  opening  words  of 

Uncertain  met>  /t     i  ^\  i  i  i     i   ^  ^ 

apuoricai  aiiu-  Deborah  s  song  (Judg.  v,  2)  have  long  puzzled  transla- 
sions.  ^^j.g  ^^^  exegetes.     The  English  version,  following  sub- 

stantially the  Syriac  and  Arabic,  renders  the  Hebrew  i'X-i!^"2  niyi?j  ynpa, 
"  for  the  avenging  of  Israel."  The  Septuagint  (Alex.  Codex)  has, 
"  for  the  leading  of  the  leaders,"  but  seems  to  have  been  governed  by 
the  resemblance  of  the  word  niyiB  to  the  official  name  of  Egyptian 
monarchs  riVIS,  Pharaoh.  Neither  of  these  translations  has  any 
certain  support  in  HebreAV  usage.  The  noun  jns  occurs  in  the  sing- 
ular but  twice  (Num.  vi,  5;  Ezek.  xliv,  20),  and  in  both  places 
means  a  lock  of  hair.  The  plural  form  of  the  word,  TViV^^,  occurs 
only  here  and  in  Deut.  xxxii,  42,  and  in  both  places  would  seem  to 
mean,  most  legitimately,  locks  of  hair,  or  jfoxovig  locks.  And  why 
should  it  be  thought  to  mean  any  thing  else  ?  So  far  from  being 
incongruous,  it  best  suits  the  imagery  of  the  immediate  context  in 
Deut.  xxxii,  42.  Jehovah  there  says:  "I  will  make  my  arrows 
drunk  with  blood  (Heb.  D"ntp,  from  blood),  and  my  sword  shall  de- 
vour flesh — Avith  the  blood  (or,  from  the  blood)  of  slain  and  of  cap- 
tives, from  the  head  of  hairy  locks  of  the  enemy  " — that  is,  from 
the  blood  of  the  hairy  heads  of  the  enemies.  And  so  at  the  be- 
ginning of  Deborah's  song  we  may  understand  a  bold  metaphor, 

'  Meyer  observes  :  "  Piuil,  in  the  vivacity  of  his  imagination,  conceives  to  himself 
the  congregation  of  his  readers  as  a  plant  (comp.  Matt,  xiii,  3),  perhaps  a  tree  (Matt, 
vii,  17),  and  at  the  same  time  as  a  building.''''  Critical  Com.  on  EphesiariS,  iu  loco. 
"  The  perfect  participles,"  says  Braune,  "  denote  a  state  in  which  Paul's  readers  are 
and  continue  to  be,  whicli  is  the  presupposition  in  order  that  they  may  be  al)le  to 
know.  .  .  .  They  mark  that  a  jirofouudly  penetrating  life  {tp^i^Dfiivot)  and  a  well 
grounded,  permanent  character  {Te-dBfieliD^iivoi)  are  necessary.  The  double  figure 
strengthens  the  notion  of  the  relation  to  love ;  this  latter  {kv  ayuTrrj)  is  made  promi- 
nent by  being  placed  first.  In  marks  love  as  the  soil  in  which  they  are  rooted,  and 
as  the  fountiation  on  Avhich  they  are  grounded.  This  implies  moreover  that  it  is  not 
their  own  love  which  is  referred  to,  but  one  which  conesponds  with  the  soil  afforded 
to  the  tree,  the  foundation  given  to  the  house ;  and  this  would  undoubtedly  be,  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  context,  the  love  of  Christ,  were  not  all  closer  definition  wanting, 
even  the  article.  Accordingly,  this  substantive  rendered  general  by  the  absence  of 
the  article  corresponds  with  the  verbal  idea  :  in  loving,  i.  e.,  in  (hat  love,  which  is 
first  God's  in  Christ,  and  then  that  of  men  who  became  Christians,  who  are  rooted  in 
him  and  grounded  on  him  througli  faith."  Commentary  on  Ephesians  (Lange's  Bible- 
work),  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  263 

"In  the  loosing  of  locks  in  Israel;  "  for  the  primary  meaning  of  the 
verb  yiSi  is  everywhere  that  of  letting  something  loose,  and  when 
used  of  locks  of  hair  would  naturally  denote  the  loosing  of  the 
hair  from  all  artificial  coverings  and  restraint,  and  leaving  it  to 
wave  wildly,  as  was  done  in  the  case  of  a  Nazarite.  The  metaphor 
of  the  passage  would  thus  be  an  allusion  to  the  unrestrained  growth 
of  the  locks  of  those  who  took  upon  themselves  the  vows  of  a 
Nazai'ite.  And  this  view  of  the  passage  is  corroborated  by  the 
next  line  of  the  parallelism,  "In  the  free  self-offering  of  the  peo- 
ple." The  people  had,  so  to  speak,  by  this  act  of  consecration, 
made  themselves  free-will  offerings.  Nothing,  therefore,  could  be 
more  striking  and  impressive  than  these  metaphorical  allusions  at 
the  opening  of  this  hymn: 

In '  the  loosing  of  locks  in  Israel, 
In  the  free  self-offering  of  the  people, 
Praise  Jehovah! 

In  Psa.  xlv,  1,  "  My  heart  boils  up  Avith  a  goodly  word,"  it  is 
difiicult  to  determine  whether  the  allusion  is  to  an  overflowing 
fountain,  or  to  a  boiling  pot.  The  primary  idea,  according  to 
Gesenius,  lies  in  the  noise  of  water  boiling  or  bxabbling,  and  as  the 
word  t^'nn  occurs  nowhere  else,  but  its  derivative,  riL'^nno,  denotes  in 
Lev.  ii,  7 ;  vii,  9,  a  pot  or  vessel  used  both  for  boiling  and  frying, 
it  is  perhaps  safer  to  say  that  the  allusion  in  the  metaphor  of  Psa. 
xlv,  i,  is  to  a  boiling  pot.  The  heart  of  the  Psalmist  was  hot  with  a 
holy  fervour,  and,  like  the  boiling  oil  of  the  vessel  in  which  the 
meat-offering  was  prepared,  it  seethed  and  bubbled^ in  the  rapture 
of  exulting ^ong. 

The  exact  point  of  the  allusion  in  the  words,  "buried  wiih  him 
through  baptism  into  death"  (Rom.  vi,  4),  and  "buried  Buried  with 
with  him  in  baptism"  (Col.  ii,  12),  has  been  disputed.  2p£„;^''''iS 
The  advocates  of  immersion  insist  that  there  is  an  allu-  death. 
sion  to  the  mode  in  which  the  rite  of  water  baptism  was  performed, 
and  most  interpreters  have  acknowledged  that  such  an  allusion  is 
in  the  word.  The  immersion  of  the  candidate  was  thought  of  as  a 
burial  in  the  water.  But  the  context  in  both  passages  goes  to  show 
that  the  great  thought  of  the  apostle  was  that  of  the  believer's 
death  unto  sin.     Thus,  in  Romans,  "  Are  ye  ignorant  that  as  many 

•  The  preposition  3,  m,  points  out  the  condition  of  the  people  in  which  they  con- 
quered and  sang.  Tlie  song  is  the  people's  consecration  hymn,  and  praises  God  for 
the  prosperous  and  successful  issue  with  which  he  has  crowned  their  vows.  Cassel's 
Commentary  on  Judges  (Lange's  Biblework),  in  loco.  Comp.  Whedon's  Old  Testament 
Commentary,  in  loco. 


264  PRINCIPLES  OF 

of  us  as  were  baptized  into  Christ  Jesus  were  baptized  into  his 
death?  We  were  buried  therefore  with  him  through  baptism  into 
death.  .  .  .  We  have  become  united  with  the  likeness  of  his  death 
(ver.  5).  .  .  .  Our  old  man  was  crucified  with  him  (ver.  6).  .  .  .  We 
died  Avith  Christ  (ver.  8).  .  .  .  Even  so  consider  ye  yourselves  to 
be  dead  unto  sin,  but  alive  unto  God  in  Christ  Jesus"  (ver.  11), 
Kow,  while  the  word  buried  tcith  {awddfrrui)  would  naturally  ac- 
cord with  the  idea  of  an  immersion  into  w^ter,  the  main  thought 
is  the  deadness  unto  sin,  attained  through  a  union  with  Christ  in 
the  likeness  of  his  death.  The  imagery  does  not  depend  on  the  mode 
of  Christ's  execution  or  of  his  burial,  much  less  on  the  manner 
in  which  baptism  was  administered,  but  on  the  similitude  of  his 
death  (t(5  d[ioi(l)jxaTi  rov  davdrov  avrov,  ver.  5)  considered  as  an  ac- 
7  complished  fact.  The  baptism  is  into  death,  not  into  water;  and 
whether  the  outward  rite  were  performed  by  sprinkling,  or  pour- 
ing, or  immersion,  it  would  have  been  equally  true  in  either  case, 
that  they  were  "buried  with  him  through  the  baptism  into  the 
death."  Or  he  might  have  said,  "We  were  crucified  with  him 
through  baptism  into  death;"  and  then  as  now  it  would  have  been 
the  end  accomplished,  the  death,  not  the  mode  of  the  baptism,  which 
is  made  prominent.  In  the  briefer  form  of  expression  in  Col.  ii,  12, 
it  is  written,  simply,  "  having  been  buried  with  him  in  baptism." 
Here,  however,  the  context  shows  that  the  leading  thought  is  the 
same  as  in  Rom.  vi,  3-11.  The  burial  in  baptism  (ev  rc5  PaTrriaiiari, 
in  the  matter  of  baptism)  figured  "  the  putting  off  of  the  body  of 
the  flesh;"  that  is,  the  utter  stripping  off  and  casting  aside  the  old 
carnal  nature.  The  burial  is  not  to  be  thought  of  as  a  mode  of 
putting  a  corpse  in  a  grave  or  sei)uk'lire,  but  as  indicating  that  the 
body  of  sin  is  truly  dead.  Having  thus  clearly  defined  the  real 
point  of  the  allusion  it  need  not  be  denied  or  disputed  that  the 
figure  also  may  include,  incidentally,  a  reference  to  the  practice  of 
immersion.  But,  as  Eadie  observes,  "  Whatever  may  be  otherwise 
said  in  favour  of  immersion,  it  is  plain  that  here  the.  burial  is 
wholly  ideal.  Believers  are  buried  in  baptism,  but  even  in  immer- 
sion they  do  not  go  through  a  process  having  any  resemblance  to 
the  burial  and  resurrection  of  Christ." '  To  maintain  from  such  a 
metaphorical  allusion,  where  the  process  and  mode  of  burial  are  not 
in  point  at  all,  that  a  burial  into,  and  a  resurrection  from,  water, 
are  essential  to  valid  baptism,  would  seem  like  an  extravagance  of 
dogmatism. 

'  Commentary  ou  the  Greek  Text  of  Colossiaus,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  265 


CHAPTER  XIL 

FABLES,    RIDDLES,    AND    ENIGMAS. 

Passing  now  from  the  more  common  figures  of  speech,  we  come  to 
those  peculiar  tropical  methods  of  conveying  ideas  and 

.  11-1111  ./o  More  proml- 

impressmg  truths,  which  hold  a  special  prominence  in  cent  scriptural 
the  Holy  Scriptures.  These  are  known  as  fables,  rid-  ''''"P'^^- 
dies,  enigmas,  allegories,  parables,  proverbs,  types,  and  symbols. 
In  order  to  appreciate  and  properly  interpret  these  special  forms 
of  thought,  a  clear  understanding  of  the  more  common  rhetorical 
figures  treated  in  the  previous  chapters  is  altogether  necessary. 
For  the  parable  will  be  found  to  correspond  with  the  simile,  the 
allegory  with  the  metaphor,  and  other  analogies  will  be  traceable 
in  other  figures.  A  scientific  analysis  and  treatment  of  these  more 
prominent  tropes  of  Scripture  will  require  us  to  distinguish  and  dis- 
criminate between  some  things  which  in  popular  speech  are  fre- 
qurently  confounded.  Even  in  the  Scripture  itself  the  proverb,  the 
parable,  and  the  allegory  are  not  formally  distinguished.  In  the 
Old  Testament  the  word  b^  is  applied  alike  to  the  proverbs  of 
Solomon  (Prov.  i,  1;  x,  1;  xxv,  1),  the  oracles  of  Balaam  (Num. 
xxiii,  7;  xxiv,  8),  the  addresses  of  Job  (Job  xxvii,  1;  xxix,  1),  the 
taunting  speech  against  the  King  of  Babylon  (in  Isa.  xiv,  4,  ff.), 
and  other  prophecies  (Micah  ii,  4;  Hab.  ii,  6).  In  the  New  Testa- 
ment the  word  uapa/SoA^,  parable,  is  applied  not  only  to  what  are 
admitted  on  all  hands  to  be  parables  proper,  but  also  to  proverb 
(Luke  iv,  23),  and  symbol  (Heb.  ix,  9),  and  type  (Heb.  xi,  19). 
John  does  not  use  the  word  naQajioXri  at  all,  but  calls  the  allegory 
of  the  good  shepherd  in  chap,  x,  6,  a  iraQoiiiia,  which  word  Peter 
uses  in  the  sense  of  a  proverb  or  byword  (2  Peter  ii,  22).  The 
word  allegory  occurs  but  once  (Gal.  iv,  24),  and  then  in  verbal 
form  {dXXrjyoQovfxeva)  to  denote  the  allegorizing  process  by  which 
certain  Old  Testament  facts  might  be  made  to  typify  Gospel  truths. 
Lowest  of  these  special  figui'es,  in  dignity  and  aim,  is  the  fable. 
It  consists  essentially  in  this,  that  individuals  of  the  characteristics 
brute  creation,  and  of  animate  and  inanimate  nature,  are  ^^  ^^^  ^'^'^'®- 
introduced  into  the  imagery  as  if  possessed  with  reason  and  speech, 
and  are  represented  as  acting  and  talking  contrary  to  the  laws  of 
their  being.     There  is  a  conspicuous  element  of  unreality  about  the 


266  PRINCIPLES   OP 

wliulo  machinery  of  fables,  and  yet  the  moral  intended  to  be  set 
forth  is  usually  so  manifest  that  no  difficulty  is  felt  in  imderstand- 
ing  it. 

The  oldest  fable  of  which  we  have  any  trace  is  that  of  Jotham, 
recorded  in  Judg,  ix,  7-20.  The  trees  are  rej^rcsented 
as  going  forth  to  choose  and  anoint  a  king.  They  in- 
vite the  olive,  the  fig-tree,  and  the  \me  to  come  and  reign  over 
them,  but  these  all  decline,  and  urge  that  their  own  natural  purpose 
and  products  require  all  their  care.  Then  the  trees  invite  the 
bramble,  which  does  not  refuse,  but,  in  biting  irony,  insists  that  all 
the  trees  shall  come  and  take  refuge  under  its  shadow!  Let  the 
olive-tree,  and  the  fig-tree,  and  the  vine  come  under  the  protecting 
shade  of  the  briar !  But  if  not,  it  is  significantly  added,  "  Let  fire  go 
forth  from  the  bramble  and  devour  the  cedars  of  Lebanon."  Tlie 
miserable,  worthless  bramble,  utterly  unfit  to  shade  even  the  small- 
est shrub,  might,  nevertheless,  well  serve  to  kindle  a  fire  that  would 
quickly  devour  the  noblest  of  trees.  So  Jotham,  in  giving  an  im- 
mediate application  of  his  fable,  predicts  that  the  weak  and  worth- 
less Abimelech,  whom  the  men  of  Shechem  had  been  so  fast  to 
make  king  over  them,  would  prove  an  accursed  torch  to  burn  their 
noblest  leaders.  All  this  imagery  of  trees  Avalking  and  talking  is 
at  once  seen  to  be  purely  fanciful.  It  has  no  foundation  in  fact, 
and  yet  it  presents  a  vivid  and  impressive  j^icture  of  the  i)olitical 
follies  of  mankind  in  accepting  the  leadership  of  such  worthless 
characters  as  Abimelech. 

Another  fable,    quite   similar   to   that  of   Jotham,    is    found   in 

2  Kings  xiv,  9,  where  Jehoash,  the  King  of  Israel,  an- 
Jehoash's  fable.  °.  '     '  ,  _     ,,  '      ^  .  ^     ^^.  '  ^ 

swei's  the  warlike  challenge  oi  Amaziah,  Kmg  of  Ju- 

dah,  by  the  following  short  and  pungent  apologue:  "The  thorn- 
bush  whi(;h  is  in  Lebanon  sent  to  the  cedar  which  is  in  Lebanon, 
saying,  Give  tliy  daughter  to  my  son  for  a  wife;  and  there  passed 
over  a  beast  of  the  field  which  was  in  Lebanon,  and  trampled  down 
the  thornbush."  This  fable  embodies  a  most  contemj)tuous  re- 
sponse to  Amaziah,  intimating  that  his  pride  of  heart  and  self-con- 
ceit were  moving  him  to  attempt  things  far  beyond  his  proper 
sphere.  The  beast  trampling  down  the  thornbush  intimates  that  a 
passing  incident,  which  could  have  no  effect  on  a  cedar  of  Lebanon, 
might  easily  destroy  the  briar.  Jehoash  does  not  proudly  boast 
that  he  himself  will  come  forth,  and  by  his  military  forces  crush 
Amaziah;  but  suggests  that  a  passing  judgment,  an  incidental 
circumstance,  would  be  sufficient  for  that  purpose,  and  it  were 
therefore  better  for  the  presumptuous  King  of  Judah  to  remain  at 
home  in  his  proper  place. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  267 

The  ai^ologues  of  Jotham  and  Jehoash  are  the  only  proper  fables 
that  appear  in  the  Bible.  In  the  interpretation  of  these  fabulous  ima 
we  should  guard  against  pressing  the  imagery  too  far.  gwy  not  to  be 
We  are  not  to  suppose  that  every  word  and  allusion  fatbe^inteiTre^ 
has  some  special  meaning.  In  the  apologue  of  Jehoash  tation. 
we  are  not  to  say  that  the  thornbush  was  Amaziah,  and  the  cedar 
Jehoash,  and  the  wild  beast  the  warriors  of  the  latter ;  and  yet,  by 
the  contrast  between  the  cedar  and  the  thornbush,  the  kins:  of 
Israel  would,  doubtless,  impress  his  contempt  for  Amaziah  upon 
the  latter's  mind,  and  thus  seek  to  humiliate  his  pride.  Neither 
are  we  to  suppose  that  Amaziah  had  asked  Jehoash  to  give  his 
daughter  in  marriage  to  his  son ;  nor  that  "  Israel  might  properly 
be  regarded  as  Jehoash's  daughter,  and  Judah  as  Amaziah's  son" 
(Thenius),  as  if  Amaziah  had  formally  demanded,  as  Josephus 
states,  (Ant.  ix,  9,  2),  a  union  of  the  two  kingdoms.  Nor  in  the 
fable  of  Jotham  are  we,  like  some  of  the  ancient  interpreters,  to 
understand  by  the  olive,  the  fig-tree,  and  the  vine,  the  three  great 
judges  that  had  preceded  Abimelech,  viz.,  Othniel,  Deborah,  and 
Gideon,  nor  seek  for  hidden  meanings  and  thrusts  in  such  words  as 
anoint,  reign  over  us,  and  shadoio.  We  should  always  keep  in 
mind  that  it  is  one  distinguishing  feature  of  fables  that  they  are 
not  exact  parallels  of  those  things  to  which  they  are  designed  to  be 
applied.  They  are  based  on  imaginary  actions  of  irrational  crea- 
tures, or  inanimate  things,  and  can  therefore  never  be  true  to 
actual  life. 

We  should  also  note  how  completely  the  spirit  and  aim  of  the 
fable  accords  with  irony,  sarcasm,  and  ridicule.  Hence  its  special 
adaptation  to  expose  the  follies  and  vices  of  men.  "  It  is  essential- 
ly of  the  earth,"  says  Trench,  "and  never  lifts  itself  above  the 
earth.  It  never  has  a  higher  aim  than  to  inculcate  maxims  of  pru- 
dential morality,  industry,  caution,  foresight ;  and  these  it  will  some- 
times recommend  even  at  the  expense  of  the  higher  self -forgetting 
virtues.  The  fable  just  reaches  that  pitch  of  morality  which  the 
world  will  understand  and  approve."^  But  this  able  and  excellent 
writer  goes,  as  we  think,  too  far  when  he  says  that  the  fable  has  no 
proper  place  in  the  Scripture,  "  and,  in  the  nature  of  things,  could 
have  none,  for  the  purpose  of  Scripture  excludes  it."  The  fables 
noticed  above  are  a  part  of  the  Scripture  which  is  received  as  God- 
inspired  (2  Tim.  iii,  16) ;  and  though  it  is  not  God  that  speaks 
through  them,  but  men  occupying  an  earthly  standpoint,  that  fact 
does  not  make  good  the  assertion  that  such  fables  have  no.  true 
place  in  Scripture.     For  the  teachings  of  Scripture  move  in  the 

^  Notes  on  the  Parables,  p.  10. 


268  PRINCIPLES   OF 

realm  of  earthly  life  and  human  thought  as  well  as  in  a  higher  and 
holier  element,  and  sarcasm  and  caustic  rebukes  find  a  place  on  the 
sacred  page.  The  record  of  Adam's  naming  the  beasts  and  fowls 
that  w«re  brought  to  him  in  Eden  (Gen.  ii,  19)  suggests  that  their 
qualities  and  habits  impressed  his  mind  with  significant  analogies. 
Many  of  the  most  useful  proverbs  are  abbreviated  fables  (Prov. 
vi,  6;  XXX,  15,  25-28),  Though  the  fable  moves  in  the  earthly  ele- 
ment of  prudential  morality,  even  that  element  may  be  pervaded 
and  taken  possession  of  by  the  divine  wisdom.' 

The  riddle  differs  from  the  fable  in  being  designed  to  puzzle  and 
Characteristics  perplex  the  heai'er.  It  is  purposely  obscure  in  order  to 
or  the  riddle,  test  the  sharpness  and  penetration  of  those  who  attempt 
to  solve  it.  The  Hebrew  word  for  riddle  (HTn)  is  from  a  root  wliich 
means  to  twist,  or  tie  a  knot,  and  is  used  of  any  dark  and  intricate 
saying,  which  requires  peculiar  skill  and  insight  to  unravel.  The 
queen  of  Sheba  made  a  journey  to  Solomon's  court  to  test  him  with 
riddles  (1  Kings  x,  1).  It  is  declared,  at  the  beginning  of  the  Book 
of  the  Proverbs,  that  it  is  the  part  of  true  wisdom  "  to  understand 
a  proverb  and  an  enigma  (HVyO)  ;  words  of  the  wise  and  their 
riddles"  (Prov.  i,  6).  The  psalmist  says,  "I  will  incline  my  ear  to 
a  proverb;  I  will  open  on  a  harp  my  riddle"  (Psa.  xlix,  4).  "I 
will  open  my  mouth  in  a  proverb ;  I  will  pour  forth  riddles  of  old  " 
(Ixxviii,  2).  Riddles,  therefore,  dark  sayings,  enigmas,  which  con- 
ceal thought,  and,  at  the  same  time,  incite  the  inquiring  mind  to 
search  for  their  hidden  meanings,  have  a  place  in  the  Scripture. 

Samson's  celebrated  riddle  is  in  the  form  of  a  Hebrew  coui^let 
(Judges  xiv,  14): 

Out  of  the  eater  came  forth  food. 

And  out  of  strength  came  forth  sweetness. 

The  clue  to  this  riddle  is  furnished  in  the  incidents  related  in 
Samson's  rid-  vcrses  8  and  9.  Out  of  the  cai'cass  of  a  devouring 
^^  beast  came  the  food  of  which  both  Samson  and  his 

parents  had  eaten;  and  out  of  that  Avhich  had  been  the  embodi- 
ment of  strength,  came  forth  the  sweet  honey,  which  the  bees  had 
deposited  therein.  But  Samson's  companions,  and  even  his  parents, 
were  not  acquainted  with  these  facts.     Their  ignorance,  however, 

'  The  profound  significance  of  Jotham's  fable  is  declared  l)_v  Cassel  to  he  inoxliaust- 
ible.  "  Its  truth  is  of  perpetual  recurrence.  Mure  than  once  was  Israel  in  the  posi- 
tion of  the  Shechcmites;  then,  especially,  when  lie  whose  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world, 
refused  to  be  a  king.  Then,  too,  Ilcrod  and  Pilate  became  friends.  The  thorubush 
seemed  to  be  king  when  it  encircled  the  head  of  the  Crucilic<l.  But  Israel  experienced 
what  is  here  denounced :  a  fire  went  forth  and  consumed  city  and  people,  temple  and 
fortress."  Cassel's  Commentary  on  Judges  (Lange'a  Biblework),  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  269 

is  no  ground  for  saying  that  therefore  Samson's  riddle  was  no 
proper  riddle  at  all.  "The  ingenuity  of  the  riddle,"  says  Cassel, 
"  consists  precisely  in  this,  that  the  ambiguity  both  of  its  language 
and  contents  can  be  turned  in  every  direction,  and  thus  conceals  the 
answer.  It  is  like  a  knot  whose  right  end  cannot  be  found.  .  .  . 
Samson's  problem  distinguishes  itself  only  by  its  peculiar  ingenuity. 
It  is  short  and  simple,  and  its  words  are  used  in  their  natural  signi- 
fication. It  is  so  clear  as  to  be  obscure.  It  is  not  j^roperly  liable 
to  the  objection  that  it  refers  to  an  historical  act  which  no  one  could 
know.  The  act  was  one  which  was  common  in  that  country.  Its 
tui-ning  2)oint,  Avitli  reference  to  the  riddle  was,  not  that  it  was  an 
incident  of  Samson's  j)ersonal  history,  but  that  its  occurrence  in 
general  was  not  imjiossible."  ^ 

A  notable  example  of  riddle  in  the  New  Testament  is  that  of  the 
mystic  number  of  the  beast  propounded  in  Rev.  xiii,  18.  The  number  of 
"  Here  is  wisdom.  Let  him  that  has  understanding  the  beast. 
reckon  the  number  of  the  beast,  for  it  is  a  man's  number ;  and  his 
number  is  six  hundred  sixty-six."  Another  very  ancient  reading, 
but  probably  the  error  of  a  copyist,  makes  the  number  six  hundred 
and  fourteen.  This  riddle  has  perplexed  critics  and  interpreters 
through  all  the  ages  since  the  Apocalypse  was  written.^  The  num- 
ber of  a  man  would  most  naturally  mean  the  numerical  value  of  the 
letters  which  compose  some  man's  name,  and  the  two  names  which 
have  found  most  favour  in  the  solution  of  this  problem  are  the 
Greek  Aareivoq,  and  the  Hebrew  "iDp  piJ.  Either  of  these  names 
makes  up  the  required  number,  and  one  or  the  other  will  be  adopt- 
ed according  to  one's  interpretation  of  the  symbolical  beast  in 
question. 

Some  of  the  sayings  of  the  wise  in  the  Book  of  Proverbs  seem  to 
have  been  made  purposely  obscure.     Who  shall  decide 
the  real  meaning  of  Prov.  xxvi,  10?     The  English  ver- 
sion renders:  "The  great  God  that  formed  all  things  both  reward- - 
eth  the  fool,  and  rewardeth  transgressors."     But  the  margin  gives 
us  an  alternative  reading :  "  A  great  man  grieveth  all,  and  he  hireth 
the  fool,  he  hireth  also  transgressors."     Others  ti-anslate :  "As  the 
archer  that  Avoundeth  every  one,  so  is  he  that  hireth  the  fool,  and 
he  that  hireth  the  passer-by."     Others :  "  An  arrow  that  woundeth 
every  one  is  he  Avho  hireth  a  fool  and  he  who  hireth  vagrants." 
Others:  "A  master  forms  all  things  himself,  but  he  that  hires  a 
fool  is  as  he  that  hires  vagrants."     And  the  Hebrew  words  of  the 

'  Commentary  on  Judges,  in  loco. 

*  For  the  various  conjectures  see  the  leading  Commentaries  on  the  passage,  espe- 
cially Stuart,  Ellkitt,  and  Diisterdieck. 


Lamech's  sonor 


270  PRINCIPLES   OF 

original  are  susceptible  of  still  other  renderings.  A  proverb  couched 
in  words  susceptible  of  so  many  different  meanings  may  well  be 
called  a  riddle  or  "  dark  saying."  It  was  probably  designed  to 
puzzle,  and  the  variety  of  meanings  attaching  to  its  woi-ds  was  a 
reason  Avith  the  author  for  choosing  just  those  words. 

One  of  the  "  dark  sayings  of  old  "  is  the  poetic  fragment  ascribed 
to  Lamecli  (Gen.  iv,  23,  24),  which  may  be  closely  rendered  thus : 

Adah  and  Zillah,  hear  nij'  voice ; 
Wives  of  Lamech,  listen  to  my  saying; 
For  a  man  have  I  slaiu  for  my  wound, 
And  a  cliild  for  my  bruise. 
For  sevenfold  avenged  should  Cain  be, 
And  Lamech  seventy  and  seven. 

The  obscurity  attaching  to  this  song  arises  probably  from  our 
isrnorance  of  the  circumstances  which  called  it  forth.  Some  have 
supposed  that  Lamech  Avas  smitten  with  remorse  over 
the  murder  of  a  young  man,  and  these  Avords  are  his 
lamentation.  Others  suppose  he  had  killed  a  man  in  self-defense, 
or  in  retaliation  for  wounds  received.  Others  make  the  song  a  tri- 
umphant exultation  over  Tubal-cain's  invention  of  brass  and  iron 
Aveapons,  and,  translating  the  verb  as  a  future  "  I  will  slay,"  regard 
the  utterance  as  a  pompous  threat.  Verse  24  is  then  understood 
as  a  blasphemous  boast  that  he  could  noAv  aA'enge  his  own  wrongs 
ten  times  more  thoroughly  than  God  Avould  aA'enge  the  slaying  of 
Cain,'  Possibly  the  Avhole  song  was  originally  intended  as  a  riddle, 
and  was  as  perplexing  to  Lamech's  Avives  as  to  modern  expositors. 

It  would  be  Avell  to  make  a  formal  distinction  between  the  riddle 
„.,.,       ,        and  the  enigma,  and  aprJy  the  former  terra  to  such  in- 

Riddle  and  on-        ,  .  . 

iirma  should  be  tricate  Sayings  as  deal  essentially  AA'ith  earthly  things, 
tib  ingiub  L't .  ^^^  ^^,^  especially  designed  to  exercise  human  ingenuity 
and  shrcAvdness.  Such  Avere  Samson's  riddle,  and  the  puzzling 
questions  put  to  Solomon  by  the  Queen  of  Sheba,  the  number  of 
the  beast,  and  proverbs  like  that  noticed  above  (Prov.  xxvi,  10). 
Enigmas,  on  tlie  other  hand,  Avould  be  the  more  fitting  name  for 
those  mystic  utterances  Avhich  serve  both  to  conceal  and  enhance 
some  deep  and  sacred  thought.  But  the  AA'ords  have  been  so  long 
used  interchangeably  of  both  classes  of  dark  sayings  that  Ave  can 
scarcely  expect  to  change  from  such  indiscriminate  usage. 

The  Avord  enigma  [alviyiia)  occurs  but  once  (1  Coi*.  xiii,  12)  in  the 
NcAV  Testament,  but  in  the  Septuagint  it  is  employed  as  the  Greek 
equivalent  of  the  Hebrew  HTn.     In  1   Cor.  xiii,  12,  it  is  used  to 

'  For  a  full  synopsis  of  the  various  interpretations  of  this  song,  see  M'Clintock  and 
Strong's  Cyelopicdia,  article  Lamech.  . 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  271 

indicate  the  dim  and  imperfect  manner  in  which  in  this  life  we  ap- 
prehend heavenly  and  eternal  things:  "For  we  see  now  through  a 
mirror  in  enigma."  Most  expositors  take  the  words  in  enigma  ad- 
verbially, in  the  sense  of  darkly,  dimly,  in  an  enigmatical  way. 
"  But  alviy^a^''  says  Meyer,  "  is  a  dark  saying,  and  the  idea  of  the 
saying  should  as  little  be  lost  here  as  in  Num.  xii,  8.  Luther  ren- 
ders rightly:  in  a  dark  word ;  which,  however,  should  be  explained 
more  precisely  as  by  nieans  of  an  enigmatic  word,  whereby  is  meant 
the  word  of  the  Gospel  revelation,  which  capacitates  for  the  seeing 
(j3^eneiv)  in  question,  however  imperfect  it  be,  and  is  its  medium  to 
us.  It  is  aivtyfia,  inasmuch  as  it  affords  to  us  no  full  clearness  of 
light  upon  Grod's  decrees,  ways  of  salvation,  etc.,  but  keeps  its  con- 
tents sometimes  in  greater,  sometimes  in  a  less,  degree  (Rom.  xi,  33; 
1  Cor.  ii,  9)  concealed,  bound  up  in  images,  similitudes,  types,  and 
the  like  forms  of  human  limitation  and  human  speech,  and  conse- 
quently is  foy  us  of  a  mysterious  and  enigmatic  nature,  standing  in 
need  of  a  future  Xvacg  (solution),  and  vouchsafing  marig  (faith),  in- 
deed, but  not  eldog  (appearance,  2  Cor.  v,  7)."^ 

There  is  an  eniofmatical  element  in  our  Lord's  discourse  with 
Nicodemus,  John  iii,  1-13.  The  profound  lesson  con-  Enigmatical 
tained  in  the  words  of  verse  3 :  "  Except  a  man  be  born  ^ordrVo"  niS 
from  above  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God,"  per-  demus. 
plexed  and  confounded  the  Jewish  ruler.  Deep  in  his  heart  the 
Lord,  who  "knew  Avhat  was  in  man"  (ii,  25),  discerned  his  sjnr- 
itual  need.  His  thoughts  were  too  much  upon  the  outward,  the 
visible,  the  fleshly.  The  miracles  of  Jesus  had  made  a  deep  im- 
pi-ession,  and  he  would  inquire  of  the  great  wonder-worker  as  of  a 
divinely  commissioned  teacher.  Jesus  stops  all  his  compliments, 
and  surprises  him  with  a  mysterious  word,  which  seems  equivalent 
to  saying:  Do  not  now  talk  about  my  works,  or  of  whence  I  came; 
turn  your  thoughts  upon  your  inner  self.  What  you  need  is  not 
new  knowledge,  but  new  life;  and  that  life  can  be  had  only  by  an- 
other bi7'th.  And  when  Nicodemus  uttered  his  surprise  and  won- 
der, he  was  rebuked  by  the  reflection,  "  Art  thou  the  teacher  of 
Israel,  and  knowest  not  these  things?"  (ver.  10).  Had  not  the 
psalmist  prayed,  "  Create  in  me  a  clean  heart,  O  God?  "  (Psa.  Ii,  10). 
Had  not  the  law  and  the  prophets  spoken  of  a  divine  circumcision 
of  the  heart?  (Deut.  xxx,  6;  Jer.  iv,  4;  Ezek.  xi,  19).  Why  then 
should  such  a  man  as  Nicodemus  express  surprise  at  these  deep 
sayings  of  the  Lord?  Simply  because  his  heart-life  and  spiritual 
discernment  were  unable  then  to  apprehend  "the  things  of  the 
Spirit  of  G.od"  (1  Cor.  ii,  14).     They  were  as  a  riddle  to  him. 

1  Meyer  on  Corinthiaus,  in  loco. 


273  PRINCIPLES    OP 

The  same  style  of  enigmatical  discourse  appears  in  Jesus'  say- 
ings in  the  synagogue  at  Capernaum  (John  vi,  53-59);  also  in  his 
first  words  to  the  woman  of  Samaria  (John  iv,  10-15),  and  in  his 
response  to  the  disciples  when  they  i*eturned  and  "wondered  that 
he  was  talking  with  a  woman,"  and  asked  him  to  eat  of  the  food 
they  had  procured  (John  iv,  32-38).  His  reply,  in  this  last  case, 
was,  "I  have  food  to  eat  which  ye  do  not  know."  They  mis- 
understood him,  as  did  Nicodemus  and  the  Samaritan  woman. 
"What  wonder,"  says  Augustine,  "if  that  woman  did  not  under- 
stand Avater?  Behold,  the  disciples  do  not  yet  understand  food."  ' 
They  wondered  whether  any  one  had  brought  him  something  to 
eat  during  their  absence,  and  then  Jesus  spoke  more  plainly:  "My 
food  is  that  (tVa,  indicating  conscious  aim  and  purpose)  I  shall  do 
the  will  of  him  that  sent  me,  and  shall  complete  his  work."  His 
success  with  the  Samaritan  woman  was  to  him  better  food  than  any 
bodily  sustenance,  for  it  elevated  his  soul  into  the  holy  conviction 
and  assiirance  that  he  should  successfully  accomplish  the  whole  of 
that  work  for  which  he  came  into  the  world.  And  then  he  pro- 
ceeds, adhering  still  to  the  tone  and  style  of  intermingled  enigma 
and  allegory:  "Do  not  ye  say  that  there  is  yet  a  four-month,  and 
the  harvest  comes?  Behold,  I  say  unto  you.  Lift  up  your  eyes  and 
look  on  the  fields,  that  they  are  white  unto  harvest.  Already "  he 
that  reaps  is  receiving  reward  and  gathering  fruit  into  {slg,  as  into 
a  garner)  life  eternal,  that  he  who  sows  and  he  who  reaps  may  re- 
joice together."  The  winning  of  that  one  Samaritan  convert  opens 
to  Jesus'  prophetic  soul  the  great  Gospel  harvest  of  the  near  future, 
and  he  speaks  of  it  as  already  at  hand.  Whether  we  regard  the 
saying,  "  There  is  yet  a  four-month,  and  the  harvest  comes,"  as  a 
proverb  (Lightfoot,  Tholuck,  Liicke,  De  Wette,  Stier),  equivalent 
to.  There  is  a  space  of  four  months  between  seedtime  and  harvest, 
or  understand  that  the  neighbouring  grain  fields  were  just  sown,  or 
just  now  green  with  the  young  tender  grain  (Meyer  and  many), 
and  over  them  many  Samaritans  appeared  coming  to  him  (ver.  30), 
the  great  thought  is  still  the  same,  and  emphasizes  the  actual  joy 
of  Jesus  in  that  hour  of  ingathering.  Sower  and  reaper  were  to- 
gether there  and  then,  but  the  disciples  could  scarcely  take  in  the 
full  import  of  Jesus'  glowing  words.  "The  disciples  saw  no  har- 
vest field;  they  said  and  they  thought  assuredly.  There  must  be  at 
least  four  months  yet !     But  the  Lord  sets  before  them  a  mystery 

'  In  Joannis  Evangelium  Tractatus  xv,  31. 

^  Most  of  the  oldest  and  beat  manuscript  authorities  omit  koI  after  ^drj,  and  many 
of  the  best  critics  join  ijdr/  with  what  follows.  So  Schulz,  Tischendorf,  Godet,  and 
Westcott  and  Ilort. 


BIBLICAL    IIERMENEUTICS.  273 

and  an  enigma,  and  thereby  would  teach  them  to  lift  up  aright  the 
eyes  of  their  faith.  Behold,  I  say  unto  you,  I  have  now  been  sow- 
ing the  word,  and  already  behold  a  sudden  harvest  upspringing  and 
ready.  Should  not  this  be  my  meat  and  my  joy?  O  ye,  my  reap- 
ers, rejoice  together  with  me,  the  sower,  and  forget  ye  also  to 
eat  ! "  ' 

The  words  of  Jesus  in  Liike  xxii,  36,  are  an  enigma.  As  he  was 
about  to  ffo  out  to  Gethsemane  he  discerned  that  the   ^  ,         .  .^ 

^    .  ....  Enigma  of  the 

hour  of  peril  was  at  hand.  He  reminded  his  disciples  sword  in  Luke 
of  the  time  when  he  sent  them  forth  without  purse,  ^^"' ' 
wallet,  or  shoes  (Luke  ix,  1-G),  and  drew  from  them  the  acknowl- 
edgement that  they  had  then  lacked  nothing.  "But  now,"  said  he, 
"he  that  has  a  purse,  let  him  take  it,  and  likewise  a  wallet;  and  he 
that  has  not,  let  him  sell  his  mantle,  and  buy  a  sword."  He  would 
impress  them  with  the  feeling  that  the  time  of  fearful  conflict  and 
exposure  was  now  imminent.  They  must  expect  to  be  assailed, 
and  should  be  prepared  for  all  righteous  self-defense.  They  would 
see  times  when  a  sword  would  be  worth  more  to  them  than  a  man- 
tle. But  our  Lord,  evidently,  did  not  mean  tliiit  they  should,  liter- 
ally, arm  themselves  with  the  weapons  of  a  carnal  warfare,  and  use 
the  sword  to  propagate  his  cause  (Matt,  xxvi,  52;  John  xviii,  36). 
He  would  significantly  warn  them  of  the  coming  bitter  conflict  and 
opposition  they  must  meet.  The  world  would  be  against  them,  and 
assail  them  in  many  a  hostile  form,  and  they  should  therefore  pre- 
pare for  self-defense  and  manly  encounter.  It  is  not  the  sword  of 
the  Spirit  (Eph.  vi,  17)  of  which  the  Lord  here  speaks,  but  the 
sword  as  the  symbol  of  that  warlike  heroism,  that  bold  and  fearless 
confession,  and  that  inflexible  purpose  to  maintain  the  truth,  which 
would  soon  be  a  duty  and  a  necessity  on  the  part  of  the  disciples 
in  order  to  defend  their  faith.  But  the  disciples  misunderstood 
these  enigmatical  words,  and  spoke  of  two  swords  which  they  had 
with  them !  Jesus  paused  not  to  explain,  and  broke  off  that  con- 
versation "  in  the  tone  of  one  who  is  conscious  that  others  would 
not  yet  understand  him,  and  who,  therefore,  holds  further  speech 
unprofitable."^  His  laconic  answer,  it  U  enoiKjh,  was  "a  gentle 
turning  aside  of  further  discussion,  with  a  touch  of  sorrowful 
irony.     More  than  your  two  swords  ye  need  not !  "  ^ 

A  similar  enigma  appears  in  John  xxi,  18,  where  Jesus  says  to 
Simon  Peter:  "When  thou  wast  young  thou  girdedst  Eniffmaticai 
thyself,  and  walkedst  whither  thou  wouldest;  but  when  words  to  peter, 
thou  shalt  be  old  another  shall  gird  thee  and  carry  thee  ^'^^^  ^^^'    ' 

'  Stier,  Words  of  Jesus,  in  loco.  ^  Van  Oosterzee's  Commentary  on  Luke 

(Lange's  Biljlework),  in  loco.  °  Meyer,  in  loco. 

18 


274  PRINCIPLES   OF 

whither  tliou  v.ouldest  not/'  The  writer  iminediately  adds  that 
Jesus  thereby  signified  (orji^iaivoiv)  "  by  what  death  he  should  glorify 
God."  But  it  is  scarcely  probable  that  Peter  then  fully  compre- 
hended the  saying,     Comp.  also  John  ii,  19, 

The  prophetic  picture  of  the  two  eagles  in  Ezek,  xvii,  2-10,  is  a 

mixture  of  enigma  (mTi)  and  fable  (7!^D),     It  is  fabu- 
The  two  eagles  °  \t-/  , 

of  Ezek.  xvii,  lous  SO  far  as  it  represents  the  eagles  as  acting  with 
^'^^'  human  intelligence  and  will,  but,  aside  from  this,  its 

imagery  belongs  rather  to  the  sphere  of  prophetic  symbols.  Alto- 
gether, it  is  an  enigma  of  high  prophetic  character,  a  "  dark  say- 
ing," in  which  the  real  meaning  is  concealed  behind  typical  images. 
In  its  interpretation  we  need  to  take  the  whole  chapter  together, 
and  we  observe  that  it  has  three  distinct  parts:  (1)  The  enigma 
(verses  1-10);  (2)  its  interpretation  (11-21);  (3)  a  Messianic  proph- 
ecy based  upon  the  foregoing  imagery  (22-24).  The  great  eagle 
represents  the  king  of  Babylon,  Nebuchadnezzar.  The  "  great 
wings,  with  long  pinions,  full  of  feathers  of  many  colours  "  (ver.  3), 
altogether  furnish  a  striking  figure  of  majesty,  rapidity  of  move- 
ment, and  splendour  of  regal  power.  Most  expositors  explain  the 
great  wings  as  denoting  the  wide  dominion  of  this  eagle;  the  long 
pinions  as  the  extent  and  energy  of  his  military  power;  the  fulness 
of  feathers  to  the  multitude  of  subjects;  and  the  many  colours  to  the 
diversitj^  of  their  nations,  languages,  and  customs.  But  the  tracing 
of  such  special  allusions  in  the  natural  appendages  of  the  eagle  is 
of  doubtful  worth,  and  should  not  be  made  prominent.  It  is  better 
to  understand  in  a  more  general  w\ay  the  strength,  rapidity,  and 
glory  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  Lebanon  is  mentioned  because  of  its 
being  the  natural  home  of  the  cedar,  but  it  hero  represents  Jerusa- 
lem (ver.  12),  which  was  the  home  and  seat  of  the  royal  seed  of 
Judah.  The  leafy  crown  and  topmost  shoots  of  the  cedar  are  the 
king  and  princes  of  Judah  whom  Nebuchadnezzar  carried  away  to 
Babylon  (2  Kings  xxiv,  14,  15).  Babylon  is  here  called,  enigmat- 
ically, "a  land  of  Canaan,"  because  its  commerce  and  its  diplomacy 
had  made  it  "  a  city  of  merchants."  Its  self-seeking  spirit  of  policy 
and  trade  made  it  a  land  of  Canaan  (Eng,  Ver.,  "  trafiic  "). 

And  now  the  figure  changes.  The  eagle  "took  of  the  seed  of 
the  land,"  of  the  same  land  where  the  cedar  grew,  "  and  put  it  in 
a  field  of  seed  "  (ver.  5)  where  it  had  every  chance  to  grow.  Nay, 
he  took  it  upon  many  "waters  as  one  would  plant  a  willow;  that  is, 
with  the  care  and  foresight  that  one  would  exercise  in  setting  a 
willow  in  a  well-watered  soil  in  which  alone  it  can  flourish.  But 
this  "seed  of  the  land"  was  not  the  seed  of  a  willow,  but  of  a 
vine,  and  it  "  sprouted  and  became  a  spreading  vine  of  low  stature; "" 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  27? 

and  it  was  the  plan  of  the  eagle  that  this  lowly  vine  should  "  turn 
its  branches  toward  him,  and  its  roots  under  him"  (ver.  G).  The 
"  seed  of  the  land "  (ver.  5)  was  the  royal  seed  of  the  kingdom  of 
Judah  (ver.  13),  Zedekiah,  whom  Nebuchadnezzar  made  king  in 
Jerusalem  after  the  capture  of  Jehoiachin  (2  Kings  xxiv,  17). 

The  other  great  eagle  was  the  king  of  Egypt,  less  mighty  and 
glorious  than  the  other.  Toward  this  second  eagle  the  vine  turned 
her  roots  and  sent  forth  her  branches  (ver.  7).  The  impotent  but 
rebellious  Zedekiah  "  sent  his  messengers  to  Egypt "  for  horses  and 
people  to  help  him  against  Nebuchadnezzar  (ver.  15).  But  it  was 
all  in  vain.  He  who  broke  his  covenant  and  despised  his  oath 
(ver.  18)  could  not  prosper;  it  required  no  great  arm  or  many  peo- 
ple to  uproot  and  destroy  such  a  feeble  vine.  The  eagle  of  Egypt 
was  powerless  to  help,  and  the  Chald»an  forces,  like  a  destructive 
east  wind  (ver,  10),  utterly  withered  it  away.  All  this  is  brought 
out  forcibly  in  the  solemn  words  of  the  "oracle  of  the  Lord  Jeho- 
vah," verses  16-21. 

Thus  far  the  imagery  has  been  a  mixture  of  fable  and  symbol,' 
but  with  verse  22  the  prophet  enters  a  higher  plane  of  prophecy. 
The  eagles  drop  out  of  view  entirely,  and  Jehovah  himself  takes 
from  the  leafy  crown  of  the  high  cedar  a  tender  shoot  (comp.  Isa. 
xi,  1;  liii,  2)  and  plants  it  upon  the  lofty  mountain  of  Israel,  where 
it  becomes  a  glorious  cedar  to  shelter  and  shade  "  every  bird  of 
every  wing."  This  is  a  noble  prophecy  of  the  Messiah,  springing 
from  the  stock  of  Judah,  and  developing  from  the  holy  '■  mountain 
of  the  house  of  Jehovah"  (Micah  iv,  1,  2)  a  kingdom  of  marvellous 
growth  and  of  gracious  protection  to  all  who  may  seek  its  shelter. 
We  should  note  especially  haw  the  Messianic  prophecy  here  leaves 
the  realm  of  fable  and  takes  on  the  style  of  allegory  and  parable. 
Com-p.  Matt,  xiii,  31,  32. 

1  Schroder  observes  that  the  mixed  figure  here  used  by  Ezekiel  goes  far  beyond 
mere  popular  illustration,  and  must  not  "be  explained  away  from  the  aesthetic  stand- 
point, as  merely  another  rhetorical  garb  for  the  thought.  As  in  the  parable  the  em- 
blematic form  preponderates  over  the  thought,  so  also  here.  What  the  prophet  is  to 
say  to  Israel  is  said  by  the  whole  of  that  mighty  array  of  figurative  expression,  for 
which  the  animal  and  vegetable  worlds  furnish  the  figures.  But  the  eagle  does  what 
eagles  otherv.'ise  never  do  ;  and  what  is  planted  as  a  willow  grows  as  a  vine ;  and  the 
vine  is  represented  as  falling  in  love  with  the  other  eagle.  The  contradictory  char- 
acter of  such  a  representation,  and  the  fact  that  in  the  difficulties  to  be  solved 
(ver.  9,  sq.)  the  comparison  comes  to  a  stand,  and  the  closing  Messianic  poftion  in 
which  the  whole  culminates,  convert  the  parable  into  a  riddle.  A  trace  of  irony  and 
the  moral  tendency,  such  as  belong  to  the  fable,  are  not  wanting."  Commentary  on 
Ezekiel  (in  Lange's  Biblework),  in  loco. 


>76  PRINCIPLES   OF 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

INTERPRETATION    OF    PARABLES. 

Among  the  figurative  forms  of  scriptural  speech  the  parable  has  a 

notable  pre-eminence.     We  find  a  number  of  examples  ' 
of    parabolic   in  the   Old   Testament,  and  the   esteem   in   which  this 
teaching.         niode  of  teaching  was  held  by  the  ancient  Jews  is  ap- 
])arent  from  the  following  words  of  the  son  of  Sirach: 

He  who  gives  his  soul  and  exercises  his  mind  in  the  law  of  the 

Most  High 
Will  seek  out  the  wisdom  of  the  ancients, 
And  will  be  occupied  with  propliecies. 
He  will  observe  the  utterances  of  men  of  fame, 
And  will  enter  with  them  into  the  twists  {oTpo^alg)  of  parables. 
He  will  seek  out  the  hidden  things  of  proverbs, 
And  busy  himself  with  the  enigmas  of  parables.' 

Parables  are  especially  worthy  of  our  study,  inasmuch  as  they  were 
the  chosen  methods  by  which  our  Lord  set  forth  many  revelations 
of  his  heavenly  kingdom.  They  were  also  employed  by  the  great 
rabbis  who  -were  contemporary  with  Jesus,  and  they  frequently  ap- 
pear in  the  Talmud  and  other  Jewish  books.  Among  all  the  orien- 
tal peoples  they  appear  to  have  been  a  favourite  form  of  conveying 
moral  instruction,  and  find  a  place  in  the  literature  of  most  nations. 
The  word  jxirable  is  derived  from  the  Greek  verb  napajSdXXo),  to 
The  parable  de-  f^i^oio  or  j!>feee  b>/  the  side  of,  and  carries  the  idea  of 
flied-  placing  one  thing  by  the  side  of   another  for  the  pur- 

pose of  comparison.  The  word  has  been  somewhat  vaguely  used, 
as  we  have  seen  above,"  to  represent  the  Hebrew  ?B^,  and  to  desig- 
nate proverbs,  types,  and  symbols  (as  in  Luke  iv,  23;  Heb.  ix,  9; 
xi,  19).  But,  strictly  speaking,  the  parable  belongs  to  a  style  of 
figurative  speecli  which  constitutes  a  class  of  its  own.  It  is  essen- 
tially a  comparison,  or  simile,  and  yet  all  simdes  are  not  parables. 
The  simile  may  appropriate  a  comparison  from  any  kind  or  class  of 
objects,  whether  real  or  imaginary.  The  parable  is  limited  in  its 
range,  and  confined  to  that  which  is  real.  Its  imagery  always  em- 
bodies a  narrative  which  is  true  to  the  facts  and  experiences  of  hu- 
man life.  It  makes  no  use,  like  the  fable,  of  talking  birds  and 
'  Ecclesiasticus  xxxix,  1-3.  *  See  above  on  p.  265. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  277 

beasts,  or  of  trees  in  council.  Like  the  riddle  and  enigma,  it  may 
serve  to  conceal  a  truth  fi-om  those  who  have  not  spiritual  pene- 
tration to  perceive  it  under  its  figurative  form;  but  its  narrative 
style,  and  the  formal  comparison  always  announced  or  assumed, 
differentiate  it  clearly  from  all  classes  of  knotty  sayings  which  are 
designed  mainly  to  puzzle  and  confuse.  The  parable,  when  once 
understood,  unfolds  and  illustrates  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  The  enigma  may  embody  profound  truths,  and  make 
much  use  of  metaphor,  but  it  never,  like  the  parable,  forms  a  nar- 
rative, or  assumes  to  make  a  formal  comparison.  The  parable  and 
the  allegory  come  nearer  together,  so  that,  indeed,  parables  have 
been  defined  as  "historical  allegories;"  '  but  they  differ  from  each 
other  in  substantially  the  same  way  as  simile  differs  from  meta- 
phor. The  parable  is  essentially  a  formal  comparison,  and  requires 
its  interpreter  to  go  beyond  its  own  narrative  to  bring  in  its  mean- 
ing; the  allegory  is  an  extended  metaphor,  and  contains  its  inter- 
pretation within  itself.  The  parable,  therefore,  stands  apart  by  it- 
self as  a  mode  and  style  of  figurative  speech.  It  moves  in  an 
element  of  sober  earnestness,  never  transgressing  in  its  imagery 
the  limits  of  probability,  or  of  what  might  be  actual  fact.  It  may 
tacitly  take  up  within  itself  essential  elements  of  enigma,  type, 
symbol,  and  allegory,  but  it  differs  from  them  all,  and  in  its  own 
chosen  sphere  of  real,  every-day  life,  is  peculiarly  adapted  to  body 
forth  special  teachings  of  Him  who  is  "  the  Verax,  no  less  than  the 
F^n<6',  and  the  Veritas.^^  * 

The  general  design  of  parables,  as  of  all  other  kinds  of  figurative 
language,  is  to  embellish  and  set  forth  ideas  and  moral  General  use  of 
truths  in  attractive  and  impressive  forms.  Many  a  parables. 
moral  lesson,  if  spoken  in  naked,  literal  style,  is  soon  forgotten;  but, 
clothed  in  parabolic  dress,  it  arouses  attention,  and  fastens  itself  in 
the  memory.     Many  rebukes  and  pungent  warnings  may  be  couched 

'  Davidson's  Hermeneutics,  p.  311. 

'^  Trench  on  the  Miracles,  p.  127.  This  eminent  divine,  whose  work  on  the  para- 
bles is  one  of  the  best  of  its  Icind,  traces  to  considerable  extent  the  differences 
between  the  parable,  the  fable,  the  myth,  the  proverb,  and  the  allegory,  and  sums 
up  as  follows :  "  The  parable  differs  from  the  fable,  moving  as  it  does  in  a  spiritual 
world,  and  never  transgressing  the  actual  order  of  things  natural ;  from  the  mythus, 
there  being  in  the  latter  an  unconscious  blending  of  the  deeper  meaning  with  the  out- 
ward symbol,  the  two  remaining  separate  and  separable  in  the  parable  ;  from  the 
proverb,  inasmuch  as  it  is  longer  carried  out,  and  not  merely  accidentally  and  occa- 
sionally, but  necessarily  figurative  ;  from  the  allegory,  comparing  as  it  does  one  thing 
with  another,  at  the  same  time  preserving  them  apart  as  an  inner  and  an  outer,  not 
transferring,  as  does  the  allegory,  the  proprieties,  and  (puilities,  and  relations  of  one 
lo  the  other."— Notes  on  the  Parables,  pp.  15,  16.     New  York,  1857. 


•278  PRINCIPLES   OF 

in  a  parable,  and  thereby  give  less  offence,  and  yet  work  better 
effects  than  open  plainness  of  speech  could  do.  Nathan's  par- 
able (in  2  Sam.  xii,  1-4)  prepared  the  heart  of  David  to  receive 
with  profit  the  keen  reproof  he  v/as  about  to  administer.  Some  of 
our  Lord's  most  ]Dointcd  parables  against  the  Jews — parables  which 
they  perceived  were  directed  against  themselves — embodied  re- 
proof, rebuke,  and  warning,  and  yet  by  their  form  and  drapery, 
they  served  to  shield  him  from  open  violence  (Matt,  xxi,  45;  Mark 
xii,  12;  Luke  xx,  19).  It  is  easy,  also,  to  see  that  a  parable  may 
enshrine  a  profound  truth  or  mystery  which  the  hearers  may  not 
at  first  apprehend,  but  which,  because  of  its  striking  or  memorable 
form,  abides  more  firmly  in  the  mind,  and  so  abiding,  yields  at 
length  its  deep  and  precious  meaning.' 

The  special  reason  and  purpose  of  the  parables  of  Jesus  are  stated 
Special  reason  in  Matt,  xiii,  10-17.  Up  to  that  point  in  his  ministry 
and  puipose  of  jggug  appears  not  to  have  spoken  in  parables.  "  The 
Jesus.  words  of  grace   (Aoy^a  rrjg  x^P'-'^^?)   which    proceeded 

from  his  mouth"  (Luke  iv,  22)  in  the  synagogue,  by  the  seashore, 
and  on  the  mount,  were  direct,  simple,  and  plain.  lie  used  simile 
and  metaphor  in  the  sermon  on  the  mount,  and  elsewhere.  In  the 
synagogue  at  Nazareth  he  quoted  a  familiar  proverb  and  called  it  a 
parable  (Luke  iv,  23).  His  words  had  power  and  authority,  unlike 
those  of  the  scribes,  and  the  people  were  astonished  at  his  teaching. 
But  there  came  a  time  Avhen  he  notably  changed  his  style.  His 
simple  precepts  were  often  met  with  derision  and  scorn,  and  among 
the  multitudes  there  were  always  some  who  were  anxious  to  pervert 
his  sayings.  When  multitudes  gathered  by  the  sea  of  Galilee  to 
liear  him,  "  and  he  spoke  to  them  many  things  in  parables  "  (Matt, 
xiii,  3),  his  disciples  quickly  observed  tlie  change  and  asked  him, 
"Why  in  parables  dost  thou  speak  to  them?"  Our  Lord's  answer 
is  remarkable  for  its  blended  use  of  metaphor,  proverb,  and  enigma, 
so  combined  and  connected  with  a  prophecy  of  Isaiah  (vi,  9,  10), 
that  it  becomes  in  itself  one  of  the  profoundest  of  his  discourses. 

Because  to  you  it  is  given  to  know  tlie  mysteries  of  tlie  kingdom  of  tlie 
lieiivens,  but  to  them  it  is  not  given.  For  whosoever  lias,  to  iiim  shall  be 
i;ivc'ii  and  he  shall  supeiabound;  but  whosoever  has  not,  even  what  he  has 

'  Treiieh  writes  of  our  Lord's  parables  :  "His  words  laid  up  in  tlic  memory  were  to 
many  that  heard  them  like  the  money  of  another  country,  unavailable,  it  might  be,  for 
present  use,  of  which  they  knew  not  the  value,  but  which  yet  was  ready  in  their  hand 
when  they  reached  that  land  and  were  naturalized  in  it.  When  the  Spirit  came  and 
brought  all  things  to  their  remembrance,  then  he  filled  all  the  outh'nes  of  truth  which 
they  before  possessed  with  its  substance,  quickened  all  its  forms  with  the  power  and 
spirit  uf  life." — Notes  on  tlie  Parables,  p.  28. 


BIBLICAL   HERMEJs^EUTICS.  279 

shall  be  taken  away  from  him.  Therefore  I  speak  to  them  in  parables;  be- 
cause seeing  they  do  not  see,  and  hearing  they  do  not  hear,  nor  understand. 
And  with  them  is  fulfilled  the  projDhecy  of  Isaiah,  which  says.  By  hearing 
ye  shall  hear  and  in  no  wise  understand  ;  and  seeing  ye  shall  see  and  in  no 
wise  perceive ;  for  thick  became  the  heart  of  this  people,  and  they  heard 
heavily  with  their  ears,  and  their  eyes  they  closed,  lest  haply  they  should 
perceive  with  their  eyes,  and  with  their  ears  hear,  and  with  the  heart  un- 
derstand, and  should  turn  again,  and  I  should  heal  them.    Matt,  xiii,  11-15. 

The  great  thought  in  this  answer  seems  to  be  that  the  Lord  had 
a  twofold  purpose  in  the  use  of  parables,  namely,  both 
to  reveal  and  to  conceal  great  truths.'  There  was,  first,  reveal  and  con- 
that  inner  circle  of  followers  who'  received  his  word  with  ^^^^  ^^"''^' 
joy,  and  who,  like  those  who  shared  in  the  secret  counsels  of  other 
kingdoms,  were  gifted  to  know  the  mysteries  of  the  Messianic  reign/ 
long  hidden,  but  now  about  to  be  made  known  (comp.  Rom.  xi,  25  ; 
xvi,  25  ;  Col.  i,  26).  These  should  realize  the  truth  of  the  proverb, 
"Whosoever  has  to  him  shall  be  given,"  etc.  This  proverb  ex- 
presses in  an  enigmatical  way  a  most  weighty  and  wonderful  law 
of  experience  in  the  things  of  God.  He  who  is  gifted  with  a  desire 
to  know  God,  and  to  appropriate  rightly  the  provisions  of  his  grace, 
shall  increase  in  wisdom  and  knowledge  more  and  more  by  the 
manifold  revelations  of  divine  truth.  But  the  man  of  opposite 
character,  who  has  heart,  soul,  and  mind  wherewith  to  love  God, 
but  is  unwilling  to  use  his  powers  in  earnest  search  for  the 
truth,  shall  lose  even  what  he  seems  to  have.^  His  powers  will 
become  weak  and  worthless  by  inactivity,  and  like  the  slothful 
servant  in  the  parable  of  the  talents,*  he  will  lose  that  which  should 
have  been  his  glory. 

1  The  iva  in  the  parallel  passages  of  Mark  iv,  12  and  Luke  viii,  10  shows  that  our 
Lord  teaches  in  these  words  the  f7ial  end  and  purpose  of  his  parables,  not  merely 
their  results.     The  quotation  from  Isaiah  evinces  the  same  thing. 

2  "  The  kingdom  of  heaven,"  says  Stier,  "is  itself  a  mystery  for  the  natural  earthly 
understanding,  and,  like  earthly  kingdoms,  it  has  its  state  secrets,  which  cannot  and 
ought  not  to  be  cast  before  every  one.  When,  on  a  frank  and  friendly  approach  be- 
ing made,  no  feeling  of  loyalty  shows  itself,  but  rather  a  threatening  of  rebellion, 
then  it  is  wise  and  reasonable  to  draw  a  veil,  which,  however,  is  willingly  removed 
whenever  any  faithful  one  wishes  to  join  himself  more  nearly  to  the  king." — Words 
of  the  Lord  Jesus,  in  loco. 

3  So  Luke  (viii,  18)  expresses  the  thought:  Kal  b  SokeI  exeiv.  On  which  Stier  re- 
marks: "For  every  excjv  (one  having)  who  does  not  keep  (KaTexei)  is  only  a  doKoiv 
exiiv  (one  seeming  to  have)  in  a  manifold  sense.  It  is  an  imaginary  having,  tlie  noth- 
ingness of  which  is  to  be  made  manifest  by  a  so-called  taking,  whicli  yet  properly 
takes  nothing  from  him.  It  is  a  having  which  has  become  lost  througli  his  unfaith- 
fulness (2  John  8)." 

*  Of  whom  the  same  proverb  is  used  again,  and  more  fully  illustrated,  Matt,  xxv, 
28,  29.     Comp.  also  John  xv,  2. 


280  PRINCIPLES   OF 

And  so  the  use  of  parables,  in  our  Lord's  teaching,  became  a  test 
Parables  a  test  ^f  character.  With  tliose  disposed  to  know  and  accept 
of  character.  iI^q  truth  the  words  of  a  parable  served  to  arouse  atten- 
tion and  to  excite  inquiry.  If  they  did  not  at  first  apprehend  the 
meaning,  they  would  come,  like  the  disciples  to  the  Master  (Matt, 
xiii,  36;  Mark  iv,  10),  and  inquire  of  him,  assured  that  all  who 
asked,  searched,  or  knocked  (Matt,  vii,  7)*  at  the  door  of  Divine 
Wisdom  should  certainly  obtain  their  desire.  Even  those  who  at 
first  are  dull  of  apprehension  may  be  attracted  and  captivated  by 
the  outer  form  of  the  parable,  and  by  honest  inquiry  come  to  master 
the  laws  of  interpretation  until  they  "know  all  parables"  (Mark 
iv,  13).  But  the  perverse  and  fleshly  mind  shows  its  real  character 
by  making  no  inquiry  and  evincing  no  desire  to  understand  the 
mysteries  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Such  a  mind  treats  those  mys- 
teries as  a  species  of  folly  (1  Cor.  i,  18). 

The  parables  of  the  Bible  are  remarkable  for  their  beauty,  vari- 
Superior  beauty  ety,  conciseness,  and  fulness  of  meaning.  There  is  a 
nesso^^'\"riptu*re  noticeable  appropriateness  in  the  parables  of  Jesus, 
parables.  and  their  adaptation  to  the   time  and  place  of  their 

first  utterance.  The  parable  of  the  sower  was  spoken  by  the  sea- 
side (Matt,  xiii,  1,  2),  whence  might  have  been  seen,  at  no  great 
distance  oif,  a  sower  actually  engaged  in  sowing  his  seed.  The 
parable  of  the  dragnet  in  the  same  chapter  (verses  47-50)  may 
have  been  occasioned  by  the  sight  of  such  a  net  close  by.  The 
parable  of  the  nobleman  going  into  a  far  country  to  receive  for 
himself  a  kingdom  (Luke  xix,  12)  was  probably  suggested  by  the 
case  of  Archelaus,  who  made  a  journey  from  Judea  to  Rome  to 
plead  his  right  to  the  kingdom  of  Herod  his  father.'  As  Jesus  had 
just  passed  thi'ough  Jericho  and  was  approaching  Jerusalem,  per- 
haps the  sight  of  the  royal  palace  which  Archelaus  had  recently 
rebuilt  at  Jericho  ^  suggested  the  allusion.  Even  the  literal  nai-ra- 
tive  of  some  of  the  parables  is  in  the  highest  degree  beautiful  and 
impressive.  The  parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan  (Luke  x,  30-37) 
was  probably  based  on  fact.  The  road  from  Jerusalem  to  Jericho 
was  notably  infested  by  robbers,  and  yet,  leading  as  it  did  from 
Perea  to  the  holy  city,  it  would  be  frequented  by  priests  and  Le- 
vites  passing  to  and  fro.  The  coldness  and  neglect  of  the  ministers 
of  the  law,  and  the  tender  compassion  of  the  Samaritan,  are  full  of 
interest  and  rich  in  suggestions.  The  narrative  of  the  Prodigal 
Son  has  been  called  "the  pearl  and  crown  of  all  the  parables  of 
Scripture,"  and  "  a  gospel  in  a  gospel." '    We  never  tire  of  its  literal 

*  Josephus,  Ant.,  xvii,  9,  1  ff.  11,  4.  *  Ibid.,  xvii,  11,  13. 

'Comp.  Trench  on  the  I'arables,  p.  316. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  281 

statements,  for  they  are  as  full  of  naturalness  and  beauty  as  they 
are  of  lessons  of  sin  and  redemption. 

The  parable  is  commonly  assumed  to  have  three  parts,  (1)  the 
occasion  and  scope,  (2)  the  similitude,  in  the  form  of  a  _ 

^     ,     '  Three  essential 

real  narrative,  and  (3)  the  moral  and  religious  lessons,  eiemeuts  of  a 
These  three  parts  are  called  by  Salmeron,  Glassius,  and  p^'"*^^^*^- 
others,  the  root  or  basis'  (radix),  the  bark  or  covering  (cortex),  and 
the  marrow  (medulla)  or  inner  substance  and  core.'  The  last  two 
are  often  called,  respectively,  the  protasis  and  the  apodosis.  The 
main  thing  in  the  construction  of  a  parable  is  its  similitude,  or  lit- 
eral narrative,  for  this  always  appears,  and  constitutes  the  parable 
as  a  figure  of  speech.  The  occasion  and  scope^  as  well  as  the  in- 
ternal sense,  are  not  always  expressed.  In  most  cases,  in  fact,  the 
apodosis,  or  inner  sense,  is  left  for  the  hearer  to  find  out  for  himself, 
and  sometimes  the  occasion  and  scope  are  difficult  to  determine. 
But  our  Lord  himself  has  given  us  two  examples  of  interpreting 
parables;''  and  frequently  the  scope  and  aj^plication  of  the  parable 
are  formally  stated  in  the  context,  so  that,  with  but  few  exceptions, 
the  parables  of  Scripture  are  not  difficult  to  explain.^ 

As  every  parable  essentially  involves  the  three  elements  named 
above,  the  hermeneutical  principles  which  should  guide  Three   princi- 
ns   in   understanding    all    parables    are    mainly   three.   fer'SSar- 
First,  we  should  determine  the  historical  occasion  and   aWes. 
aim  of  the  parable ;  secondly,  we  should  make  an  accurate  analysis 

'  Salmeron,  De  Parabolis  Domini  nostri,  tr.  iii,  p.  15.  Glassius,  Philologia  Sacra 
(Lips.  1'725)  lib.  ii,  pars  i,  tr.  ii,  sect.  5.  Home  (Introduction,  ed.  Ayre  and  Treg., 
vol.  ii,  p.  346)  adopts  the  same  division,  and  calls  the  three  parts,  respectively,  the 
root  or  scojje,  the  sensible  similitude^  and  the  explanation  or  mystical  sense.  Davidson 
(Hermeneutics,  p.  311)  says:  "In  the  parable  as  in  the  allegory  three  things  de- 
mand attention:  (1)  The  thing  to  be  illustrated  ;  (2)  the  example  illustrating;  (3)  the 
tertium  comparationis,  or  the  similitude  existing  between  them." 

2  Namely,  in  the  interpretation  of  the  parables  of  the  sower  (Matt,  xiii,  18-23)  and 
of  the  tares  of  the  field  (Matt,  xiii,  36-43).  Trench  observes,  "  that  when  our  Lord 
himself  interpreted  the  two  first  which  he  delivered,  it  is  more  than  probable  that  he 
intended  to  furnish  us  with  a  key  for  the  interpretation  of  all.  These  explanations, 
therefore,  are  most  important,  not  merely  for  their  own  sakes,  but  as  laying  down  the 
principles  and  canons  of  interpretation  to  be  applied  throughout." — Notes  on  the 
Parables,  p.  36. 

3  Trench  (Parables,  p.  32)  beautifully  observes :  "  The  parables,  fair  in  their  out- 
ward form,  are  yet  fairer  within — apples  of  gold  in  network  of  silver :  each  one  of 
them  like  a  casket,  itself  of  exquisite  workmanship,  but  in  which  jewels  yet  richer 
than  itself  are  laid  up ;  or  as  fruit,  which,  however  lovely  to  look  upon,  is  yet  more 
delectable  still  in  its  inner  sweetness.  To  find  the  golden  key  for  this  casket,  at  the 
touch  of  which  it  shall  reveal  its  treasures ;  to  open  this  fruit,  so  that  nothing  of  its 
hidden  kernel  shall  be  missed  or  lost,  has  naturally  been  regarded  ever  as  a  matter  of 
high  concern." 


282  PRINCIPLES   OP 

of  the  subject  matter,  and  observe  the  nature  and  properties  of 
the  things  employed  as  imagery  in  the  similitude ;  and  thirdly,  we 
should  interpret  the  several  parts  with  strict  reference  to  the  gen- 
eral scope  and  design  of  the  whole,  so  as  to  preserve  a  harmony  of 
proportions,  maintain  thft  unity  of  all  the  parts,  and  make  promi- 
nent the  great  central  truth.'  These  principles  can  become  of 
practical  value  only  by  actual  use  and  illustration  in  the  interpre- 
tation of  a  variety  of  parables. 

As  our  Lord  has  left  us  a  formal  explanation  of  what  were  prob- 
ably the  first  two  parables  he  uttered,  we  do  well,  first  of  all,  to 
Principles  ii-  note  the  principles  of  interpretation  as  they  appear  illus- 
lustratedmthe  ^,.j^^^.^^  j^  his  examples.  In  the  parable  of  the  sower  we 
Sower.  find  it  easy  to  conceive  the  position  and  surroundings 

of  Jesus  when  he  opened  his  parabolic  discourse.  He  had  gone  out 
to  the  seaside  and  sat  down  there,  but  when  the  multitudes  crowded 
around  him,  "  he  entered  into  a  boat  and  sat ;  and  all  tlie  multitude 
stood  on  the  beach"  (Matt,  xiii,  2).  How  natural  and  appropriate 
for  him  then  and  there  to  think  of  the  various  dispositions  and 
characters  of  those  before  him.  How  like  so  many  kinds  of  soil 
were  their  hearts.  How  was  his  preaching  "  the  word  of  the  king- 
dom" (verse  19)  like  a  sowing  of  seed,  suggested  perhaps  by  the 
sight  of  a  sower,  or  of  a  sown  field,  on  the  neighbouring  coast.' 
Nay,  how  was  his  coming  into  the  world  like  a  going  forth  to  sow. 

Passing  now  to  notice  the  similitude  itself,  we  observe  that  our 
Lord  attached  significance  to  the  seed  sown,  the  wayside  and  tlie 
birds,  the  rocky  places,  the  thorns,  and  the  good  ground.  Each  of 
these  parts  has  a  relevancy  to  the  whole.  In  that  one  field  where 
the  sower  scattered  his  grain  there  were  all  these  kinds  of  soil, 
and  the  nature  and  properties  of  seed  and  soil  are  in  perfect  keep- 
ing with  the  results  of  that  sowing  as  stated  in  the  parable.  The 
soil  is  in  every  case  a  human  heart.  The  birds  represent  the  evil 
one,'  who  is  ever  opposed  to  the  work  of  the  sower,  and  watches  to 
snatch  away  that  which  is  sown  in  the  heart,  "that  they  may  not 

1  One  may  con)i)are  the  entire  parable  with  a  circle,  of  which  tlic  middle  point  is  the 
spiritual  truth  or  doctrine,  and  of  which  the  radii  are  the  several  circumstances  of  the 
narration;  so  long  as  one  has  not  placed  himself  in  the  centre,  neither  the  circle  itself 
appears  in  its  perfect  shape,  nor  will  the  beautiful  unity  with  which  the  radii  converge 
to  a  single  point  be  perceived,  but  this  is  all  oljscrved  so  soon  as  the  eye  looks  forth 
from  the  centre.  Even  so  in  the  parable,  if  wo  have  recognized  its  middle  point,  its 
main  doctrine,  in  full  light,  then  will  the  jiroportion  and  riglit  signification  of  all  i)ar- 
ticular  circumstances  be  clear  unto  us,  and  we  shall  lay  stress  ujx)!!  them  oidy  so  far 
as  the  main  truth  is  thereby  more  vividly  set  forth. — Lisco,  Die  Parabeln  Jesu,  p.  22. 
Fairbairn's  Translation  (Edinbiirgli  Bib.  Cal)inet),  p.  29. 

'See  Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palestine,  p.  418.        ^Mark  says  Satan;  Luke,  the  deviL 


BIDLICAL    IIERMENEUTICS.  283 

believe  and  be  saved  "  (Luke  viii,  1 2).  He  who  hears  the  Word  and 
understands  not — on  whom  the  heavenly  truth  makes  no  impression 
— may  Avell  be  likened  to  a  trodden  pathway.  "  He  has  brought 
himself  to  it;  he  has  exposed  his  heart  as  a  common  road  to  every 
evil  influence  of  the  world  till  it  has  become  hard  as  a  pavement — 
till  he  has  laid  waste  the  very  soil  in  which  the  word  of  God  should 
have  taken  root;  and  he  has  not  submitted  it  to  the  ploughshare  of 
ths  law,  which  would  have  broken  it;  which,  if  he  had  suffered  it 
to  do  the  work  which  God  appointed  it  to  do,  would  have  gone  be- 
fore, preparing  that  soil  to  receive  the  seed  of  the  Gospel."  '  With 
equal  force  and  propriety  the  rocky  places,  the  thorns,  and  the 
good  grovmd  represent  so  many  varieties  of  hearers  of  the  Word. 
The  application  of  the  parable,  closing  with  the  significant  words, 
"he  that  has  ears  let  him  hear"  (verse  8),  might  be  safely  left 
to  the  minds  and  consciences  of  the  multitudes  Avho  heard  it. 
Among  those  multitudes  were  doubtless  many  representatives  of 
all  the  classes  designated. 

The  parable  of  the  tares  of  the  field  had  the  same  historical  occa- 
sion as  that  of  the  sower,  and  is  an  important  supple-   „     .,     ,  ,, 

'  .  ^  .       -i  i  Parable  of  the 

ment  to  it.  In  the  interpretation  of  the  foregoing  par-  Tares  and  its 
able  the  sower  was  not  made  prominent.  The  seed  ii^terpretation. 
was  declared  to  be  "  the  word  of  the  kingdom,"  ^  and  its  character 
and  worth  are  variously  indicated,  but  no  explanation  was  given  of 
the  sower.  In  this  second  parable  the  sower  is  prominently  set 
forth  as  the  Son  of  man,  the  sower  of  good  seed;  and  the  work  of 
his  great  enemy,  the  devil,  is  presented  with  equal  })iominence. 
But  we  are  not  to  suppose  that  this  parable  takes  up  and  carries 
with  it  all  the  imagery  and  implications  of  the  one  preceding. 
Other  considerations  are  introduced  under  other  imagery.  But  in 
seeking  the  occasion  and  connexion  of  all  the  parables  recorded  in 
Matt,  xiii,  we  should  note  how  one  grows  out  of  the  other  as  by  a 
logical  sequence.  Three  of  them  were  spoken  privately  to  the  dis- 
ciples, but  the  whole  seven  were  ap}>ropriate  for  tlie  seaside;  for 
those  of  the  mustard-seed,  the  treasure  hid  in  a  field,  and  the  drag- 
net, no  less  than  the  sower  and  the  tares  of  tlie  field,  may  have  been 
suggested  to  Jesus  by  the  scenes  around  him,  and  those  of  the 
leaven  and  the  merchantman  seeking  pearls  were  but  counterparts, 
respectively,  of  the  mustard-seed  and  the  hid  treasure.  Stiei-'s 
suggestion,  also,  is  worthy  of  note,  that  the  ])arable  of  the  tares 
corresponds  with  the  first  kind  of  soil  mentioned  in  the  parable  of 
the  sower,  and  helps  to  answer  the  question.  Whence  and  how  tliat 

'  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Parables,  p.  61. 

^  In  Luke  viii,  11,  it  is  written:  "The  seed  is  the  word  of  God." 


284  PRINCIPLES   OF 

soil  had  come  to  serve  so  well  the  purpose  of  the  devil.  The  para- 
ble of  the  mustard-plant,  whose  growth  was  so  groat,  stands  in 
notable  contrast  with  the  second  kind  of  soil  in  which  there  was  no 
real  growth  at  all.  The  parable  of  the  leaven  suggests  the  oppo- 
site of  the  heart  overgrown  with  worldliness,  namely,  a  heart  per- 
meated and  purified  by  the  inner  workings  of  grace,  while  the  fifth 
and  sixth  parables — those  of  the  treasure  and  the  pearl  of  great 
price — represent  the  various  experiences  of  the  good  heart  (repre- 
sented by  the  good  ground)  in  apprehending  and  appropriating  the 
precious  things  of  the  Word  of  the  kingdom.  The  seventh  para- 
ble, that  of  the  dragnet,  appropriately  concludes  all  with  the  doc- 
trine of  the  separating  judgment  which  shall  take  place  "  in  the 
end  of  the  age"  (verse  49).  Such  an  inner  relation  and  connexion 
we  do  well  to  trace,  and  the  suggestions  thereby  afforded  may  be 
especially  valuable  for  homiletical  purposes.  They  serve  for  in- 
struction, but  they  should  not  be  insisted  on  as  essential  to  a  cor- 
rect interpretation  of  the  several  parables. 

In  the  interpretation  of  the  second  parable  Jesus  gives  special 
Thino-s  inter-  significance  to  the  sower,  the  field,  the  good  seed,  the 
preted  and  tares,  the  enemy,  the  harvest,  and  the  reapers;  also  the 
ticed  in  Jesus'  final  burning  of  the  tares  and  the  garnering  of  the 
exposition.  wheat.  But  we  should  observe  that  he  does  not  attach 
a  meaning  to  the  men  who  slept,  nor  to  the  sleeping,  nor  to  the 
springing  up  of  tlie  blades  of  wheat,  and  their  yielding  fruit,  nor 
to  the  servants  of  the  householder  and  the  questions  they  asked. 
These  are  but  incidental  })arts  of  the  parable,  and  necessary  to  a 
happy  filling  up  of  its  narrative.  An  attempt  to  show  a  special 
meanino;  in  them  all  would  tend  to  obscure  and  confuse  the  main 
lessons.  So,  if  we  would  know  how  to  interpret  all  parables,  we 
should  notice  what  our  Lord  omitted  as  well  as  what  he  empha- 
sized in  those  expositions  which  are  given  us  as  models;  and  we 
should  not  be  anxious  to  find  a  hidden  meaning  in  every  word  and 
allusion. 

At  the  same  time  we  need  not  deny  that  these  two  parables  con- 
We  mav  notice  tained  some  other  lessons  which  Jesus  did  not  bring  out 
some  things   i^  his  interpretation.     There  was  no  need  for  liim  to 

w  hi  ell  Jesus  '■        .  ,  , 

had  no  need  to  State  the  occasioH  ot  lus  ])arables,  or  what  suggested 
'^°''^-  the  imagery  to  his  mind,  or  the  inner  logical  connexion 

which  they  sustained  to  one  another.  These  things  might  be  safe- 
ly left  to  every  scribe  who  sliould  become  a  disciple  to  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  (Matt,  xiii,  52).  In  his  ex{)lanation  of  tlie  first  parable, 
Jesus  sufficiently  indicated  that  particular  words  and  allusions,  like 
the  having  no  root  {ro fii)  t^etv  pi^av,  ]Matt.   xiii,  G),  and  choked 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  285 

(drreTTvi^av,  ver.  7;  comp.  avvTcvLyei  in  ver.  22)  may  suggest  important 
thoughts;  and  so  the  incidental  words  of  the  second  parable,  "lest 
haply  while  gathering  up  the  tares  ye  root  up  the  wheat  with  them  " 
(verse  29),  though  not  afterward  referred  to  in  the  explanation, 
may  also  furnish  lessons  worthy  of  our  consideration.  So,  too, 
it  may  serve  a  useful  purpose,  in  interpretation,  to  show  the  fitness 
and  beauty  of  any  particular  image  or  allusion.  We  would  not  ex- 
pect our  Lord  to  call  the  attention  of  his  hearers  to  such  things, 
but  his  well-disciplined  disciples  should  not  fail  to  note  the  pro- 
priety and  suggestiveness  of  comparing  the  word  of  God  to  good 
seed,  and  the  children  of  the  evil  one  to  tares,'  The  trodden  path, 
the  rocky  places,  and  the  thorny  ground,  have  peculiar  fitness  to 
represent  the  several  states  of  heart  denoted  thereby.  Even  the 
incidental  remark  "  while  men  slept  "  (Matt,  xiii,  25)  is  a  suggestive 
hint  that  the  enemy  wrought  his  malicious  work  in  darkness  and 
secrecy,  when  no  one  would  be  likely  to  be  present  and  interrupt 
him;  but  it  would  break  the  unity  of  the  parable  to  interpret  these 
words,  as  some  have  done,  of  the  sleep  of  sin  (Calovius),  or  the 
dull  slowness  of  man's  spiritual  development  and  human  weakness 
generally  (Lange),  or  the  careless  negligence  of  religious  teachers 
(Chrysostom). 

It  is  also  to  be  admitted  that  some  incidental  words,  not  designed 
to  be  made  prominent  in  the  interpretation,  may,  nev-  suggestive 
ertheless,  deserve  attention  and  comment,     Not  a  little  words  and  aiiu- 

'  .  1        T      •       T   /•  1        sions     deserve 

pleasure  and  much  mstruction  may  be  derived  from  the  Attention  and 
incidental  parts  of  some  parables.  The  hundredfold,  comment, 
sixty  fold,  and  thirtyfold  increase,  mentioned  in  the  parable  of  the 
soAver,  and  in  its  interpretation,  may  be  profitably  compared  with 
making  the  five  talents  increase  to  ten  talents,  and  the  two  to  four 
(in  Matt,  xxv,  16-22),  and  also  with  the  increase  in  the  parable  of 
the  pounds  (Luke  xix,  lG-19),  The  peculiar  expressions,  "he  that 
was  sown  by  the  wayside,"  "he  that  was  sown  upon  the  rocky 
places,"  are  not,  as  Alford  truly  observes,  "a  confusion  of  simili- 
tudes— no  primary  and  secondary  interpretation  of  OTTopog  [seed], — 
but  the  deep  truth  both  of  nature  and  of  grace.  The  seed  sown, 
springing  up  in  the  earth,  becomes  the  plant,  and  bears  the  fruit,  or 
fails  of  bearing  it;  it  is,  therefore,  the  representative,  when  sown, 
of  the  individuals  of  Avhom  the  discourse  is,"  ^  Especially  do  we 
notice  that  the  seed  which,  in  the  first  parable,  is  said  to  be  "  the 
word  of  God"  (Luke  viii,  11),  is  defined  in  the  second  as  "the 

'  Greek  iC,L^6.via,  darnel,  which  is  said  to  resemble  wheat  in  its  earlier  stages  of 
growth,  but  shows  its  real  character  more  clearly  at  the  harvest  time, 
"^  Greek  Testament,  in  loco. 


286  PRINCIPLES    OF 

children  of  tlie  kingdom  ■"  (Matt,  xiii,  38).  A  different  stage  of  prog- 
ress is  tacitly  assumed,  and  we  tliink  of  the  word  of  God  as  having 
developed  in  the  good  heart  in  which  it  was  cast  until  it  has  taken 
up  that  heart  within  itself  and  made  it  a  new  creation.' 

From  the  above  examples  we  may  derive  the  general  principles 
Not  specidc  which  are  to  be  observed  in  the  interpi-etation  of 
rules,  but  sound   pjii-ai^it^g,     Xo  Specific   rules  can  be  formed  that  will 

sense  and  d  i  s-    ^  '- 

criminating  apply  to  every  case,  and  show  what  parts  of  a  parable 
g"udeuieinter-  ^^'^  designed  to  be  significant,  and  what  parts  are  mere 
preter.  drapery  and  form.    Sound  sense  and  delicate  discrimina- 

tion are  to  be  cultivated  and  matured  by  a  protracted  study  of  all 
the  parables,  and  by  careful  collation  and  comparison.  Our  Lord's 
examples  of  interpretation  show  that  most  of  the  details  of  his  par- 
ables have  a  meaning;  and  yet  there  are  incidental  words  and  allu- 
sions which  are  not  to  be  pressed  into  significance.  We  should, 
therfore,  study  to  avoid,  on  the  one  side,  the  extreme  of  ingenuity 
which  searches  for  hidden  meanings  in  every  word,  and,  on  the 
other,  the  disposition  to  i)ass  over  many  details  as  mere  rhetorical 
figures.  In  general  it  may  be  said  that  most  of  the  details  in  a 
})arable  have  a  meaning,  and  those  which  have  no  special  signifi- 
cance in  the  interpretation,  serve,  nevertheless,  to  enhance  the  force 
and  beauty  of  the  rest.  Such  parts,  as  Boyle  observes,  "  are  like 
the  feathers  Avliieh  wing  our  arrows,  which,  though  they  pierce  not 
like  the  head,  but  seem  slight  things,  and  of  a  different  matter  from 
the  rest,  are  yet  requisite  to  make  the  shaft  to  pierce,  and  do  both 
convey  it  to  and  penetrate  the  mark."  *  We  may  also  add,  with 
Trench,  that  "  it  is  tolerable  evidence  that  we  have  found  the  ritrht 
interpretation  of  a  parable  if  it  leave  none  of  the  main  circum- 
stances unexplained.  A  false  interpretation  will  inevitably  betray 
itself,  since  it  Avill  invariably  paralyze  and  render  nugatory  some 
important  member  of  an  entire  account.  If  we  have  the  right  key 
in  our  hand,  not  merely  some  of  the  words,  but  all,  will  have  their 
corresponding  parts,  and,  moreover,  the  key  will  turn  without 
grating  or  overmuch  forcing;  and  if  we  have  the  right  interpreta- 
tion it  will  scarcely  need  to  be  defended  and  made  j)lausil)le  with 
great  appliance  of  learning,  to  be  propped  up  by  remote  allusions 
to  rabbinical  or  profane  literature,  or  by  illustrations  drawn  from 
the  recesses  of  antiquity."  ^ 

The  prophet  Isaiah,  in  chap,  v,  1-6,  sings  of  his  Beloved  Friend, 

'  "  Our  life,"  says  Lange,  "  becomes  identified  with  the  spiritual  seed,  and  principles 
assume,  so  to  speak,  a  bodily  shape  in  individuals."     Commentary  on  Matthew,  in  loco. 
*  Quoted  by  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Parables,  p.  34. 
^  Notes  on  the  Parables,  p.  «'.>. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  287 

and  his  Friend's  own  song  touching  his  vineyard,  and  in  verse  1 
declares  that 

Tlie  vineyard  of  Jehovuh  of  hosts  is  the  house  of  Israel, 
And  the  man  of  Judah  is  the  phmt  of  his  delight; 
And  he  waited  for  justice,  and  behold  bloodshed, 
For  righteousness,  and  behold  a  cry. 

This  short    explanation  gives   the   main   purpose    of  the   parable. 

No  special  meaning  is  put  on  the  digging,  the  gathering  out  of 

the  stones,   the  tower,  and  the   winevat.      Our  Lord  appropriates 

the  imagery  of  this  passage  in  his  parable  of  the  wicked   ,   .    , 

T  ,-./r  ■  .  isaiaii  s   para- 

husbandmen   (Matt.   XXI,    33-44).     But  to  understand,   weof  tiieVine- 

in  either  parable,  that  the  tower  represents  Jerusalem  ^^'^'^' 
(Grotius),  or  the  temple  (Bengel),  that  the  winevat  is  the  altar 
(Chrysostom),  or  the  prophetic  institution  (Irena^us),  that  the  gath- 
ering out  of  the  stones  denotes  the  expulsion  of  the  Canaanites 
from  the  Holy  Land,  together  with  the  stone  idols  (Grotius),  is  to 
go  upon  doubtful  ground,  and  introduce  that  which  will  confuse 
rather  than  elucidate.  These  several  jDarticulars  are  rather  to  be 
taken  together  as  denoting  the  complete  provision  which  Jehovah 
made  for  the  security,  culture,  and  prosperity  of  his  people.  "What 
is  there  to  do  more  for  my  vineyard,"  he  asks,  "  that  I  have  not 
done  in  it  ?  "  He  had  spared  no  pains  or  outlay,  and  yet,  when  the 
time  of  grape  harvest  came,  his  vineyard  brought  forth  wild  grapes. 
What  would  seem  to  have  been  so  full  of  hope  and  promise  yielded 
only  disappointment  and  chagrin.  The  grapes  he  expected  were 
truth  and  righteousness;  those  which  he  found  were  bloodshed  and 
oppression.  He  announces,  accordingly,  his  purpose  to  destroy  that 
vineyard,  and  make  it  an  utter  desolation,  a  threat  fearfully  ful- 
filled in  the  subsequent  history  of  Israel  and  the  Holy  Land. 

Such  is  the  substance  of  the  interpretation  of  Isaiah's  parable, 
but  the  language  in  which  it  is  clothed  has  many  beautiful  strokes 
and  delicate  allusions  which  are  worthy  of  attention.'  Our  Lord's 
parable  of  the  wicked  husbandmen,  which  is  based  upon  its  im- 
agery,  may   be    profitably   noticed    in    connexion   with  it.      It  is 

'Such,  for  instance,  is  the  "very  fertile  hill"  in  which  this  vineyard  was  planted; 
literally,  in  a  horn,  a  son  of  oil,  or  fatness;  metaphor  for  a  horn-shaped  hill  of  rich 
soil,  and  used  in  allusion  to  the  land  of  promise  (comp.  Deut.  viii,  7-9).  There  is 
also  an  ironical  play  on  the  Hebrew  words  iov  justice  and  bloodshed,  righteousness  and 
o-y  in  the  last  two  lines  of  verse  Y :  "He  looked  for  tOStJ'D,  mishpat,  and  behold 

'  T    ;      ■ 

natip,  mispach,  for  :i,\r\%  tzdhakah,  and  behold  npyV'  tzr/nakah:''  Contrast  also  the 
jubilant  opening  in  which  the,  prophet  essays  to  sing  his  well-beloved's  song  with  the 
change  of  person  in  verso  3  and  the  sad  tone  of  disappointment  which  follows. 


283  PRINCIPLES  OF 

recorded  by  Matthew  (xxi,  33-44),  Mark  (xii,  1-12),  and  Luke 
(xx,  9-18),  and,  though  spoken  in  tlie  cars  of  "the  peoj^le  "  (Luke 
XX,  9),  the  chief  priests,  the  scribes,  and  the  Pharisees  understood 
that  it  was  directed  against  them  (Matt,  xxi,  45;  Luke  xx,  19). 
Tlie  context  also  informs  us  (in  Matt,  xxi,  43)  that  the 

Piirablt?  of  the 

Wicked    Hus-    vineyard  represents  "  the  kingdom  of  God."    In  Isaiali's 
bandmcn.  parable  the  whole  house  of  Israel  is  at  fault,  and  is 

threatened  with  utter  destruction.  Here  the  fault  is  with  the  hus- 
bandmen to  whom  the  vineyard  was  leased,  and  whose  wickedness 
appears  most  flagrant;  and  here,  accordingly,  the  threat  is  not  to 
destroy  the  vineyard,  but  the  husbandmen.  The  great  questions, 
then,  in  the  interpretation  of  our  Lord's  parable,  are:  (1)  "What  is 
meant  by  the  vineyard?  (2)  Who  are  the  husbandmen,  servants, 
and  son  ?  (3)  AVhat  events  are  contemplated  in  the  destruction  of 
the  husbandmen  and  the  giving  of  the  vineyard  to  others  ?  These 
questions  are  not  hard  to  answer:  (1)  The  vineyard  in  Isaiah  is  the 
Israelitish  people,  considered  not  merely  as  the  Old  Testament 
Church,  but  also  as  the  chosen  nation  established  in  the  land  of 
Canaan.  Here  it  is  the  more  spiritual  idea  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
considered  as  an  inheritance  of  divine  grace  and  truth  to  be  so  ap- 
prehended and  utilized  unto  the  honour  and  glory  of  God  as  that 
husbandmen,  servants,  and  Son  may  be  joint  heirs  and  partakers  of 
its  benefits.  (2)  The  husbandmen  are  the  divinely  commissioned 
leaders  and  teachers  of  the  people,  whose  business  and  duty  it  Avas 
to  guide  and  instruct  those  committed  to  their  care  in  the  true 
knowledge  and  love  of  God.  They  were  the  chief  priests  and 
scribes  who  heard  this  parable,  and  kncAV  that  it  was  spoken  against 
them.  The  servants,  as  distinguished  from  the  husbandmen,  are  to 
be  understood  of  the  prophets,  who  toere  sent  as  special  messengers 
of  God,  and  whose  mission  was  usually  to  the  leaders  of  the  people.' 
But  they  had  been  mocked,  despised,  and  maltreated  in  many  ways 
(2  Chron.  xxxvi,  IG);  Jeremiah  was  shut  up  in  prison  (Jer.  xxxii,  3), 
and  Zechariah  was  stoned  (2  Chron.  xxiv,  21;  comp.  Matt,  xxiii, 
34-37,  and  Acts  vii,  52).  The  one  son,  the  beloved,  is,  of  course, 
the  Son  of  man,  who  "  came  unto  his  own,  and  they  that  Avere  his 
own  received  him  not"  (John  i,  11).  (3)  The  destruction  of  the 
wicked  husbandmen  was  accomplished  in  the  utter  overthrow  and 
miserable  ruin  of  the  Jewish  leaders  in  the  fall  of  Jerusalem.  Then 
the  avenging  of  "all  the  righteous  blood"  of  the  prophets  came 
upon    that    generation    (Matt,    xxiii,   35,   30),   and  then,    too,    the 

'  Servants  are  the  extraordinary  ministers  of  God,  husbandmen  tlie  ordinary.  The 
former  arc  almost  "Silways  badly  roceived  by  the  latter,  who  take  ill  the  iuterniptiou 
of  their  own  quiet  possession. — Beiigel,  Gnomon,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  289 

vineyard  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  repaired  and  restored  as  the  New 
Testament  Church,  was  transferred  to  the  Gentiles. 

There  are  many  minor  lessons  and  suggestive  hints  in  the  lan- 
guage of  this  parable,  but  they  should  not,  in  an  expo- 

°.   .  °     ,  ,      ^      -    .  .      •'         .  '  ^  Minor     points 

sition,  be  elevated  into  such  prommence  as  to  confuse  not  to  be  made 
these  leading  thoughts.  Here,  as  in  Isaiah,  we  should  P''"™i°^°t- 
not  seek  special  meanings  in  the  hedge,  winepress,  and  tower,  nor 
should  we  make  a  great  matter  of  what  particular  fruits  the  owner 
had  reason  to  expect,  nor  attempt  to  identify  each  one  of  the  ser- 
vants sent  with  some  particular  prophet  or  messenger  mentioned  in 
Jewish  history.  Still  less  should  we  think  of  finding  special  mean- 
ings in  forms  of  expression  used  by  one  of  the  evangelists  and  not 
by  another.  Some  of  these  minor  points  may  be  rich  in  sugges- 
tions and  abundantly  worthy  of  comment,  but  in  view  of  the  over- 
straining which  they  have  too  frequently  received  at  the  hands  of 
expositors  we  need  the  constant  caution  that  at  most  they  are  in- 
cidental rather  than  important. 

Two  other  parables  of  our  Lord  illustrate  the  casting  off  of  the 
Jews  and  the  calling  of  the  Gentiles.      They  are  the   ^ 

,  •'  Comparison  of 

marriage  of  the  King  s  Son  (Matt,  xxii,  2-14),  and  the  analogous  par- 
great  supper  (Luke  xiv,  16-24).  The  former  is  recorded  ^^^^^' 
only  by  Matthew,  and  follows  immediately  after  that  of  the  wicked 
husbandmen.  The  latter  is  recorded  only  by  Luke.  Some  of  the 
rationalistic  critics  have  argued  that  these  are  but  different  versions 
of  the  same  discourse,  but  a  careful  analysis  will  show  that,  while 
they  have  marked  analogies,  they  have  also  numerous  ^joints  of 
difference.  And  it  is  an  aid  to  the  interpretation  of  such  analogous 
parables  to  study  them  together  and  mark  their  diverging  lines  of 
thought.  The  jjarable  of  the  marriage  of  the  King's  Son,  as  com- 
pared with  that  of  the  wicked  husbandmen,  exhibits  an  advance  in 
thought  as  notable  as  that  observed  in  the  parable  of  the  tares  as 
compared  with  that  of  the  sower.  Trench  here  observes  "  how  the 
Lord  is  revealing  himself  in  ever  clearer  light  as  the  central  person 
of  the  kingdom,  giving  here  a  far  plainer  hint  than  there  of  the 
nobility  of  his  descent.  There  he  was  indeed  the  son,  the  only  and 
beloved  one,  of  the  householder;  but  here  his  race  is  royal,  and  he 
appears  himself  at  once  as  the  King  and  the  King's  Son  (Psa.  Ixxii,  1). 
This  appearance  of  the  householder  as  the  King  announces  that 
the  sphere  in  which  this  parable  moves  is  the  New  paraWe  of  Mar- 
Testament  dispensation — is  the  kingdom  which  was  an-  riage  of  King's 
nounced  before,  but  was  only  actually  present  with  the  Hus^bandmeu 
coming  of  the  King.  The  last  was  a  parable  (  f  the  compared. 
Old  Testament  history;  even  Christ  himself  appears  there  rather  as 
19 


290  PRINCIPLES   OF 

the  last  and  greatest  of  the  line  of  its  prophets  and  teachers  than  as 
the  founder  of  a  new  kingdom.  In  that,  a  parable  of  the  law,  God 
appears  demanding  something  from  men ;  in  this,  a  parable  of 
grace,  God  appears  more  as  giving  something  to  them.  There  he 
is  displeased  that  his  demands  are  not  complied  with,  here  that  his 
goodness  is  not  accepted;  there  he  requires,  here  he  imparts.  And 
thus,  as  we  so  often  find,  the  two  mutually  complete  one  another; 
this  taking  up  the  matter  where  the  other  left  it." '  The  great 
purpose  in  both  parables  was  to  make  conspicuous  the  shameful 
character  and  conduct  of  those  who  were  under  great  obligation  to 
show  all  possible  respect  and  loyalty.  The  conduct  of  the  hus- 
bandmen was  atrocious  in  the  extreme;  but  it  may  be  said  that  a 
claim  of  rent  was  demanded  of  them,  and  there  was  some  supposa- 
ble  motive  to  treat  the  messengers  of  the  owner  of  the  vinevard 
with  disrespect.  Not  so,  however,  Avith  those  bidden  to  the  royal 
marriage  feast.  That  guests,  honoured  by  an  invitation  from  the 
king  to  attend  the  marriage  of  his  son,  should  have  treated  such  in- 
vitation with  wilful  refusal  and  contempt,  and  even  have  gone  to 
the  extreme  of  abusing  the  royal  servants  who  came  to  bid  them  to 
the  marriage,  and  of  putting  some  to  death,  seems  hardly  conceiv- 
able. But  this  very  feature  which  seems  so  improbable  in  itself  is 
a  prominent  part  of  the  parable,  and  designed  to  set  in  the  most 
odious  light  the  conduct  of  those  chief  priests  and  Pharisees  who 
were  treating  the  Son  of  God  with  open  contempt,  and  would  fain 
have  put  him  to  death.  Such  ingratitude  and  disloyalty  deserved 
no  less  a  punishment  than  the  sending  forth  of  armies  to  destroy 
the  murderers  and  to  bi;rn  their  city  (verse  V). 

When  now  we  compare  the  parable  of  the  marriage  of  the  king's 
Parables  of  Mar-  ^^^^  with  that  of  the  great  supper  (Luke  xiv,  10)  we 
riage  of  King's  fin(j  they  botli  agree  (1)  in  having  a  festival  as  the 
Supper  com-  basis  of  their  imagery,  (2)  in  that  invitations  were  sent 
pared.  ^^  persons  already  bidden,  (3)  in  the  disrespect  shown 

by  those  bidden,  and  (4)  the  calling  in  of  the  poor  and  neglected 
from  the  streets  and  highways.  But  they  differ  in  the  following 
particulars:  The  paral^le  of  the  great  supper  was  spoken  at  an 
earlier  period  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  when  the  opposition  of  chief 
priests,  scribes,  and  Pharisees  was  as  yet  not  violent.  It  was 
uttered  in  the  house  of  a  Pharisee  whither  he  had  been  invited  to 
eat  bread  (verses  1,  12),  and  where  there  appeared  in  his  presence 
a  dropsical  man,  whose  malady  he  healed.  Thereupon  he  addressed 
a  parable  to  those  who  were  bidden,  counselling  them  not  to  recline 
on  the  chief  seat  at  table  unless  invited  there  (verses  7-11).     He 

'  Notes  on  the  Parables,  p.  ISO. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  291 

also  uttered  a  proverbial  injunction  to  the  Pharisee  who  had  in- 
vited him  to  make  a  feast  for  the  poor  and  the  maimed  i-ather  than 
kinsmen  and  rich  friends  (verses  12-14);  and  then  he  added  the 
parable  of  the  great  supper.  But  the  parable  of  the  marriage  of 
the  king's  son  was  uttered  at  a  later  period,  and  in  the  temple, 
when  no  Pharisee  would  have  invited  him  to  his  table,  and  when 
the  hatred  of  chief  priests  and  scribes  had  become  so  bitter  that  it 
gave  occasion  for  ominous  and  fearful  words,  such  as  that  parable 
contained.  We  note  further  that,  in  the  earlier  parable,  the  occa- 
sion was  a  great  supper  {delnvov),  in  the  latter  a  wedding  (yd^o^). 
In  the  one,  the  person  making  the  feast  is  simply  "a  certain  man" 
(Luke  xiv,  16),  in  the  other  he  is  a  king.  In  the  one  the  guests  all 
make  excuse,  in  the  other  they  treat  the  royal  invitation  with  con- 
tempt and  violence.  In  the  one  those  who  were  bidden  are  simply 
denounced  with  the  statement  that  none  of  them  shall  taste  of  the 
supper;  in  the  other  the  king's  armies  are  sent  forth  to  destroy  the 
murderers  of  his  servants  and  to  burn  their  city.  In  the  earlier 
parable  there  are  two  sendings  forth  to  call  in  guests,  first  from  the 
streets  and  lanes  of  the  city,  and  next  from  the  highways  and 
hedges — intimating  first  the  going  unto  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house 
of  Israel  (Matt,  x,  6;  xv,  24),  and  afterward  to  the  Gentiles  (Acts 
xiii,  46) ;  in  the  latter  only  one  outgoing  call  is  indicated,  and  that 
one  subsequent  to  the  destruction  of  the  murderers  and  their  city. 
In  that  later  prophetic  moment  Jesus  contemplated  the  ingather- 
ing of  the  Gentiles.  Then  to  the  later  parable  is  added  the  inci- 
dent of  the  guest  who  appeared  without  the  wedding  garment 
(Matt,  xxii,  11-14),  which  Strauss  characteristically  conjectures  to 
be  the  fragment  of  another  parable'  wliich  Matthew  by  mistake  at- 
tached to  this,  because  of  its  referring  to  a  feast.'  But  Avith  a 
purer  and  profounder  insight  Trench  sees  in  these  few  added  words 
"  a  wonderful  example  of  the  love  and  wisdom  which  marked 
the  teaching  of  our  Lord.  For  how  fitting  was  it  in  a  discourse 
which  set  forth  how  sinners  of  every  degree  were  invited  to  a  fel- 
lowship in  the  blessings  of  the  Gospel,  that  they  should  be  reminded 
likewise,  that  for  the  lasting  enjoyment  of  these,  they  must  put  off 
their  former  conversation — a  most  needful  caution,  lest  any  should 
abuse  the  grace  of  God,  and  forget  that  while  as  regarded  the  past 
they  were  freely  called,  they  were  yet  now  called  unto  holiness,'"' 

The  parable  of  the  barren  fig-tree  (Luke  xiii,  6-9)  had  its  special 
application  in  the  cutting  off  of  Israel,  but  it  is  not       ^be  barren 
necessarily  limited  to  that  one  event.     It  has  lessons  of       Fig-t:ec. 
universal  application,  illustrating  the  forbearance  and  longsuffering 
'Life  of  Jesus,  §  78.  ^Isotes  on  the  Parables,  pp.  179,  ISO. 


293  PRINCIPLES   OF 

of  God,  as  also  the  certainty  of  destructive  judgment  upon  every  one 
who  not  only  produces  no  good  fruit,  but  "  also  cumbers  the  ground  " 
(Kai  rrjv  yqv  Karapyel).  Its  historical  occasion  a])pears  from  the 
preceding  context,  (verses  1-5),  but  the  logical  connexion  is  not  so 
apparent.  It  is  to  be  traced,  however,  to  the  character  of  those  in- 
formants who  told  him  of  Pilate's  outrage  on  the  Galileans.  For 
the  twice-repeated  warning,  "  Except  ye  repent  ye  shall  all  likewise 
perish"  (verses  3  and  5),  implies  that  the  persons  addressed  were 
sinners  deserving  fearful  penalty.  They  were  probably  from  Je- 
rusalem, and  representatives  of  the  Pharisaic  party  who  had  little 
respect  for  the  Galileans,  and  perhaps  intended  their  tidings  to  be 
a  sort  of  gibe  against  Jesus  and  his  Galilean  followers. 

The  means  for  understanding  the  occasion  and  import  of  Nathan's 
Old  Testament  parable  (2  Sam.  xii,  1-4)  are  abundantly  furnished  in 
parables.  the  context.     The  same  is  true  of  the  parable  of  the 

wise  woman  of  Tekoah  (2  Sam.  xiv,  4-7),  and  that  of  the  wounded 
prophet  in  1  Kings  xx,  38-40.  The  narrative,  in  Eccles.  ix,  14,  15, 
of  the  little  city  besieged  by  a  great  king,  but  delivered  by  the  wis- 
dom of  a  poor  wise  man,  has  been  regarded  by  some  as  an  actual 
history.  Those  who  date  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes  under  the 
Persian  domination  think  that  allusion  is  made  to  the  delivery  of 
Athens  by  Themistocles,  when  that  city  was  besieged  by  Xerxes, 
the  great  king  of  Persia.  Others  have  suggested  the  deliverance 
of  Potidfea  (Herod.,  viii,  128),  or  Tripolis  (Diodor.,  xvi,  41).  Hitzig 
even  refers  it  to  the  little  seaport  Dora  besieged  by  Antiochus  the 
Great  (Polybius,  v,  66).  But  in  none  of  these  last  three  cases  is  it 
known  that  the  deliverance  was  eif ected  by  a  poor  wise  man ;  and 
as  for  Athens,  it  could  hardly  have  been  called  a  little  city,  with 
few  men  in  it,  nor  could  the  brilliant  leader  of  the  Greeks  be  prop- 
erly called  "  a  poor  wise  man."  It  is  far  better  to  take  the  narra- 
tive as  a  parable,  which  may  or  may  not  have  had  its  basis  in  some 
real  incident  of  the  kind,  but  M'hieh  Avas  designed  to  illustrate  the 
great  value  of  wisdom.  The  author  makes  his  own  application  in 
verse  16:  "Then  sand  I,  Better  is  wisdom  than  strength;  yet  the 
wisdom  of  the  poor  is  despised,  and  his  words — none  of  them  are 
heard."  That  is,  such  is  the  general  rule.  A  case  of  exceptional 
extremity,  like  the  siege  referred  to,  may  for  a  moment  exhibit  the 
value  of  wisdom,  and  its  superiority  over  strength  and  weapons  of 
war ;  but  the  lesson  is  soon  forgotten,  and  the  masses  of  men  give 
no  heed  to  the  words  of  the  poor,  whatever  their  wisdom  and  worth. 
The  two  verses  that  follow  (17  and  18)  are  an  additional  comment 
upon  the  lesson  taught  in  the  parable,  and  put  its  real  meaning  be- 
yond all  reasonable  doubt.     But  it  is  a  misuse  of  the  parable,  and  a 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  293 

pressing  of  its  import  beyond  legitimate  bounds,  to  say,  with  Heng- 
stenberg :  "  The  poor  man  with  his  delivering  wisdom  is  an  image 
of  Israel.  ,  .  .  Israel  would  have  proved  a  salt  to  the  heathen  world 
if  ear  had  only  been  given  to  the  voice  of  wisdom  dwelling  in  his 
midst."  *  Still  more  unsound  is  the  spiritualizing  process  by  which 
the  besieged  city  is  made  to  represent  "the  life  of  the  individual: 
the  great  king  who  lays  siege  to  it  is  death  and  the  judgment  of 
the  Lord.  "^ 

All  the  parables  of  our  Lord  are   contained  in  the  first  three 
Gospels.     Those  of  the  door,  the  good  shepherd,  and    .„, 

^  .  °  r  J  AllJesus  para- 

the  vine,  recorded  by  John,  are  not  parables  proper,  bies  in  the  sy- 
but  allegories.  In  most  instances  we  find  in  the  imme-  ^^^""^  Gospels. 
diate  context  a  clue  to  the  correct  interpretation.  Thus  the  para- 
ble of  the  unmerciful  servant  (Matt,  xviii,  23-34)  has  its  occasion 
stated  in  verses  21  and  22,  and  its  application  in  verse  35.  The  par- 
able of  the  rich  man  who  planned  to  pull  down  his  barns  and  build 
greater  in  order  to  treasure  up  all  the  increase  of  his  fields  (Luke 
xii,  16-20),  is  readily  seen  from  the  context  to  have  been  uttered 
as  a  warning  against  covetousness.  The  parable  of  the  importunate 
friend  at  midnight  (Luke  xi,  5-8)  is  but  a  part  of  a  discourse  on 
prayer.  The  parables  of  the  unjust  judge  and  the  importunate 
widow,  and  of  the  Pharisee  and  the  publican  at  prayer  (Luke  xviii, 
1-14),  have  their  purpose  stated  by  the  evangelist  who  records  them. 
The  parable  of  the  good  Samaritan  (Luke  x,  30-37)  was  called  forth 
by  the  question  of  the  lawyer,  who  desired  to  justify  himself,  and 
asked,  "Who  is  my  neighbour?" 

The  parable  of  the  labourers  in  the  vineyard  (Matt,  xx,  1-16), 
althous^h  its  occasion  and  application  are  given  in  the   „     ^,     ,  ,^ 

^  1  1    _  _    "  ,  Parable  of  the 

context,  has  been  regarded  as  difficult  of  interpretation.  Labourers  in 
It  was  occasioned  by  the  mercenary  spirit  of  Peter's  '  ^  i^^eyar  . 
question  (in  chap,  xix,  27),  "What  then  shall  we  have?"  and  its 
principal  aim  is  evidently  to  rebuke  and  condemn  that  spirit.  But 
the  diificulties  of  interpreters  have  arisen  chiefly  from  giving  undue 
prominence  to  the  minor  points  of  the  parable,  as  the  penny  a  day, 
and  the  different  hours  at  which  the  labourers  were  hired.  Stier 
insists  that  the  penny  (67]vdpLov),  or  day's  wages  ([uodog),  is  the 
principal  question  and  main  feature  of  the  parable.  Others  make 
the  several  hours  mentioned  represent  different  periods  of  life  at 
which  men  are  called  into  the  kingdom  of  God,  as  childhood,  youth, 
manhood,  and  old  age.  Others  have  supposed  that  the  Jews  were 
denoted  by  those  first  hired,  and  the  Gentiles  by  those  who  were 

'  Commentary  on  Ecclesiastes,  in  loco. 

*  Wangemann,  as  quoted  by  Delitzsch,  in  loco. 


294  PRINCIPLES    OF 

called  last.  Origen  held  that  the  different  hours  represented  the 
dilTerent  epochs  of  human  history,  as  the  time  before  the  flood, 
from  Abraham  to  Moses,  from  Moses  to  Christ,  etc.  But  all  this 
tends  to  divert  the  mind  from  the  great  thought  in  the  purpose  of 
the  parable,  namely,  to  condemn  the  mercenary  spirit,  and  indicate 
that  the  rewards  of  heaven  are  matters  of  grace  and  not  of  debt. 
And  we  should  make  very  emphatic  the  observation  of  Bengel, 
tlmt  the  parable  is  not  so  much  a  prediction  as  a  warning.'  The 
fundamental  fallacy  of  those  exegetes  who  make  the  penny  the 
most  prominent  point,  is  their  tacit  assumption  that  the  narrative 
Mistakes  of  in-  ^f  the  parable  is  designed  to  portray  a  murmuring  and 
terpreters.  fault  finding  whicli  will  actually  take  place  at  the  last 
day.  Unless  we  assume  this,  according  to  Stier,  "  no  reality  would 
con-espond  with  the  principal  point  of  the  figurative  narration."'' 
Accordingly,  the  vnaye,  go  thy  loay  (verse  14),  is  understood,  like 
the  TTopeveo^e,  depart  (of  Matt,  xxv,  41),  as  an  angry  rejection  and 
banishment  from  God;  and  the  apot'  to  oov,  take  tliine  own,  "can 
mean  nothing  else  than  what,  at  another  stage,  Abraham  says  to 
the  rich  man  (Luke  xvi,  25) :  What  thou  hast  contracted  for,  with 
that  thou  art  discharged ;  but  now,  away  from  my  service  and  from 
all  further  intercourse  with  me!""  So  also  Luther  says  that  "the 
murmuring  labourers  go  away  with  their  penny  and  are  damned." 
But  the  word  vndjo)  has  been  already  twice  used  in  this  parable 
(verses  4  and  V)  in  the  sense  of  going  away  into  the  vineyard  to 
work,  and  it  seems  altogether  too  violent  a  change  to  put  on  it  here 
the  sense  of  going  into  damnation.  Still  less  supposable  is  such  a 
sense  of  the  word  wlieu  addressed  to  those  who  had  filled  an  hon- 
ourable contract,  laboured  faithfully  in  the  vineyard,  and  "borne 
the  burden  of  the  day  and  the  burning  heat"  (verse  12). 

Let  us  now  carefully  apply  the  three  principles  of  interpretation 
enunciated  above  ^  to  the  exposition  of  this  intricate  parable.  First, 
Occasion  and  ^^^^  histoi'ical  occasion  and  scope.  Jesus  had  said  to  the 
scope.  young  man  who  had  great  possessions :  "  If  thou  wouldst 

be  perfect,  go  (vTraye),  sell  thy  possessions  and  give  to  the  poor,  and 
thou  shalt  have  treasure  in  heaven;  and  come,  follow  me"  (Matt, 
xix,  21).  The  young  man  went  away  sorrowful,  for  he  had  many 
goods  (KTiJiiara  rroXXd),  and  Jesus  thereupon  spoke  of  the  difliculty 
of  a  rich  man  entering  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven  (verses  23-26). 
"Then  answered  Peter  and  said  to  him,  Lo,  we  forsook  all  things 
and  followed  thee:  what  then  shall  we  have?"  Ti  dpa  eorai  ijijlv ; 
what  theyi  shall  be  to  usf — that  is,  in  the  way  of  compensation  and 

'  Non  est  praedictio  sed  admonitia.     Gnomon,  in  loco. 

"  Words  of  the  Lord  .Tosus,  in  loco.  «  Il.id.  ■«  Sec  above,  pp.  281,  282. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  293 

reward.  What  shall  be  our  Srjaavpdg  ev  ovpavolg,  treasure  in  heaven? 
This  question,  not  reprehensible  in  itself,  breathed  a  bad  spirit  of 
overweening  confidence  and  self-esteem,  by  its  evident  comparison 
with  the  young  man :  We  have  done  all  that  you  demand  of  him ; 
we  forsook  our  all ;  what  treasure  shall  be  ours  in  heaven?  Jesus 
did  not  at  once  rebuke  what  was  bad  in  the  question,  but,  first, 
graciously  responded  to  what  was  good  in  it,  Tliese  disciples,  who 
did  truly  leave  all  and  follow  him,  shall  not  go  without  blissful  re- 
ward. "  Verily,  I  say  unto  you  that  ye,  who  followed  me,  in  the 
regeneration,  when  the  Son  of  man  shall  sit  upon  the  throne  of  his 
glory,  ye  also  shall  sit  upon  twelve  thrones,  judging  the  twelve 
tribes  of  Israel."  This  was,  virtually,  making  to  them  a  promise 
and  pledge  of  what  they  should  have  in  the  future,  but  he  adds: 
"And  every  one  who  forsook  houses,  or  brothers,  or  sisters,  or 
father,  or  mother,  or  children,  or  lands  for  my  name's  sake,  shall 
receive  manifold  more,'  and  shall  inherit  life  eternal."  Here  is  a 
common  inheritance  and  blessing  promised  to  all  who  meet  the 
conditions  named.  But  in  addition  to  this  great  reward,  which  is 
common  alike  to  all,  there  will  be  distinctions  and  differences ;  and 
so  it  is  immediately  added:  "But  many  first  will  be  last  and  last 
first."  And  from  this  last  statement  the  parable  immediately  pro- 
ceeds :  "  For  (yap)  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like,"  etc.  This  con- 
nexion Stier  recognizes  :  "  Because  Peter  has  inquired  after  reward 
and  compensation,  Christ  says,  first  of  all,  what  is  contained  in 
verses  28,  29;  but  because  he  has  asked  with  a  culpable  eagerness 
for  reward,  the  parable  concerning  the  first  and  the  last  follows 
with  its  earnest  warning  and  rebuke." '  But  to  say,  in  the  face  of 
such  a  connexion  and  context,  that  the  reward  contemplated  in  the 
penny  has  no  reference  to  eternal  life,  but  is  to  be  understood  sole- 
ly of  temporal  good  which  may  lead  to  damnation,  is  virtually  to 
ignore  and  defy  the  context,  and  bring  in  a  strange  and  foreign 
thought.  The  scope  of  the  parable  is  no  doubt  to  admonish  Peter 
and  the  rest  against  the  mercenary  spirit  and  self-conceit  apparent 
in  his  question,  but  it  concludes,  as  Meyer  observes,  "  and  that  very 
appropriately,  with  language  which  no  doiibt  allows  the  apostles  to 
contemplate  the  prospect  of  receiving  rewards  of  a  peculiarly  dis- 
tinguished character  (xix,  28),  but  does  not  warrant  the  absolute 
certainty  of  it,  nor  does  it  recognize  the  existence  of  any  thing  like 
so-called  valid  claims."^ 

'  ^n7\m^'Xaaiova  is  the  reading  of  two  most  ancient  codices,  B  and  L,  a  number 
of  versions,  as  Syriac  and  Sahidic,  and  is  adopted  by  Laclimann,  Alford,  Tischendorf, 
Tregelles,  and  Wcstcott  and  Hort.     Comp.  Lulie  xviii,  30. 

2  Words  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  in  loco.  ^  Commentary  on  Matt,  xx,  16. 


296  PRINCIPLES   OP 

Having  ascertained  the  historical  occasion  and  scope,  the  next 

step  is  to  analyze  the  subject  matter,   and  note  what  appears  to 

liave  special  prominence.     It  will  hardly  be  disputed 

Prominent  ^  .^  11,1-, 

points  in  the  that  the  particular  agreement  01  the  householder  with 
parables.  ^^iq  labourers  hired  early  in  the  morning  is  one  point 

too  prominent  to  be  ignored  in  the  exposition.  Noticeable  also  is 
the  fact  that  the  second  class  (hired  at  the  third  hour)  go  to  work 
without  any  special  bargain,  and  rely  on  the  word  "  whatsoever  is 
right  I  will  give  you."  So  also  with  those  called  at  the  sixth  and 
ninth  hours.  But  those  called  at  the  eleventh  hour  received  (ac- 
cording to  the  true  text  of  verse  7)  no  special  promise  at  all,  and 
nothing  is  said  to  them  about  reward.  They  had  been  waiting  and 
seem  to  have  been  anxious  for  a  call  to  work,  and  were  idle  because 
no  one  had  hired  them,  but  as  soon  as  an  order  came  they  went  off 
to  their  labour,  not  stopping  so  much  as  to  speak  or  hear  about 
wages.  In  all  this  it  does  not  appear  that  the  different  hours  have 
any  special  significance;  but  we  are  rather  to  note  the  spii'it  and 
disjwsidon  of  the  different  labourers,  particularly  the  first  and  the 
last  hired.  In  the  account  of  the  settlement  at  the  close  of  the  day, 
only  these  last  and  the  first  are  mentioned  with  any  degree  of 
prominence.  The  last  are  the  first  rewarded,  and  with  such  marks 
of  favour  that  the  self-conceit  and  mercenary  spirit  of  those  who, 
in  the  early  morning,  had  made  a  special  bargain  for  a  penny  a 
day,  are  shown  in  words  of  fault  finding,  and  elicit  the  rebuke  of 
the  householder  and  the  declaration  of  his  absolute  right  to  do  what 
he  Avill  with  his  own. 

If  now  we  interpret  these  several  parts  with  strict  reference  to 
The  parable  the  occasion  and  scope  of  the  parable,  we  must  think 
primarily     an   j^£    ^^le    apostles    as   those   for   whom    its    admonition 

admonition  for  i  ^ 

the  disciples.  Avas  first  of  all  intended.  What  was  wrong  in  the 
spirit  of  Peter's  question  called  for  timely  i-ebuke  and  admoni- 
tion. Jesus  gives  him  and  the  others  assurance  that  no  man  who 
becomes  his  disciple  shall  fail  of  glorious  reward;  and,  somewhat 
after  the  styb  of  the  agreement  with  the  labourers  first  hired,  he 
bargains  with  the  twelve,  and  agrees  that  every  one  of  them  shall 
have  a  throne.  But,  he  adds  (for  such  is  the  simplest  application 
of  the  proverb,  "  Many  first  shall  be  last,"  etc.) :  Do  not  imagine, 
in  vain  self-conceit,  that,  because  you  were  the  first  to  leave  all  and 
follow  me,  you  therefore  must  needs  be  honoured  more  than  others 
who  may  hereafter  enter  my  service.  That  is  not  the  noblest  spir- 
it which  asks,  W/u/t  shall  I  have  F  It  is  better  to  ask.  What  shall 
I  do?  He  who  follows  Christ,  and  makes  all  manner  of  sacrifices 
for  his  sake,  confident  that  it  Avill  be  well,  is  nobler  than  he  who 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  297 

lingers  to  make  a  bargain.  Nay,  he  who  goes  into  the  Lord's 
vineyard  asking  no  questions,  and  not  even  waiting  to  talk  about 
the  wages,  is  nobler  and  better  still.  His  spirit  and  labour,  though 
it  continue  but  as  an  hour,  may  have  qualities  so  beautiful  and 
rare  as  to  lead  Him,  whose  heavenly  rewards  are  gifts  of  grace,  and 
not  payments  of  debts,  to  place  him  on  a  more  conspicuous  throne 
than  that  which  any  one  of  the  apostles  may  attain.  The  mur- 
muring, and  the  response  which  it  draws  from  the  householder,  are 
not  to  be  taken  as  a  prophecy  of  what  may  be  expected  to  take 
place  at  the  final  judgment,  but  rather  as  a  suggestive  hint  and 
warning  for  Peter  and  the  rest  to  examine  the  sj^irit  in  which  they 
followed  J  esus. 

If  this  be  the  real  import  of  the  parable,  how  misleading  are 
those  expositions  which  would  make  the  penny  a  day  the  most 
prominent  point.  How  unnecessary  and  irrelevant  to  regard  the 
words  of  the  householder  (in  verses  13-16)  as  equivalent  to  the  final 
sentence  of  damnation,  or  to  attach  special  significance  to  the  stand- 
ing idle.  How  unimportant  the  different  hours  at  which  the  la- 
bourers were  hired,  or  the  question  whether  the  householder  be  God 
or  Christ.  The  interpretation  which  aims  to  maintain  the  unity  of 
the  whole  narrative,  and  make  i^rominent  the  great  central  truth, 
will  see  in  this  jDarable  a  tender  admonition  and  a  suggestive  warn- 
ing against  the  wrong  spirit  evinced  in  Peter's  words.' 

The  parable  of  the  unjust  steward  (Luke  xvi,  1-13)  has  been  re- 
garded, as  above  all  others,  a  crux  interpretum.  It  parabie  of  the 
appears  to  have  no  such  historical  or  logical  connexion  unjust  steward. 
Avith  what  precedes  as  will  serve  in  any  material  "w^ay  to  help  in  its 
interpretation.  It  follows  immediately  after  the  three  parables  of 
the  lost  sheep,  the  lost  drachma,  and  the  prodigal  son,  which  were 
addressed  to  the  Pharisees  and  the  scribes  who  murmured  because 
Jesus  received  sinners  and  ate  with  them  (chap,  xv,  2).  Having 
uttered  those  parables  for  their  special  benefit,  he  spoke  one  "  also 
to  the  disciples "  [Kai  ngog  rovg  fiaT^rjrdg,  xvi,  1 ).  These  disciples 
are  probably  to  be  understood  of  that  wider  circle  which  included 
others  besides  the  twelve  (compare  Luke  x,  1),  and  among  them 
were  doubtless  many  publicans  like  Matthew  and  Zacchaius,  A\'ho 
needed  the  special  lesson  here  enjoined.  That  lesson  is  now 
quite  generally  acknowledged  to  be  a  wise  and  prudent  use  of 
this  workPs  goods.     For  the  sagacity,  shrewd  foresight,  and  care  to 

'  The  words,  "  For  many  are  called,  but  few  chosen,"  which  appear  in  some  ancient 
codices  (C,  D,  N),  at  the  close  of  verse  16,  are  wanting  in  the  oldest  and  best  manu- 
scripts (X,  B,  L,  Z),  and  are  rejected  by  the  best  textual  critics  (Tischendorf,  Tregelles, 
Westcott  and  Hort).     We  have,  therefore,  taken  no  notice  of  them  above. 


298  principl;es  of 

shift  for  himself,  which  the  steward  evinced  in  his  hasty  action 
with  his  lord's  debtors  {(ppovifxcjg  knoirjaev,  ver.  8),  are  emphatically 
the  tertium  comjmrationis,  and  are  said  to  have  been  applauded 
{k-ni^veoev)  even  by  his  master. 

The  parable  first  of  all  demands  that  we  apprehend  correctly  the 
.,        ,,     literal  import  of  its  narrative,  and  avoid  the  readinc:  or 

Unauthorized  ....  .  '^ 

additions  to  tiie  imagining  in  it  any  thing  that  is  not  really  there, 
parable.  Thus,  for  example,  it  is  said  the  steward  was  accused 

of  wasting  the  rich  man's  goods,  and  it  is  nowhere  intimated  that 
this  accusation  was  a  slander.  We  have,  therefore,  no  right  (as 
Koster)  to  assume  that  it  was.  Neither  is  there  any  warrant  for 
saying  (as  Van  Oosterzee  and  others)  that  the  steward  had  been 
guilty  of  exacting  excessive  and  exorbitant  claims  of  his  lord's 
debtors,  remitting  only  what  was  equitable  to  his  lord,  and  wasting 
the  rest  on  himself;  and  that  his  haste  to  have  them  write  down 
their  bills  to  a  lower  amount  was  simply,  on  his  part,  an  act  of  jus- 
tice toward  them  and  an  effort  to  repair  his  former  wrongs.  If 
such  had  been  the  fact  he  would  not  have  wasted  his  lord's  goods 
{ja  vndpxovra  avrov),  but  those  of  the  debtors.  Nor  is  there  any 
ground  to  assume  that  the  steward  made  restitution  from  his  own 
funds  (Brauns),  or,  that  his  lord,  after  commending  his  prudence,  re- 
tained him  in  his  service  (Bauragarten-Crusius).  All  this  is  putting 
into  the  narrative  of  our  Lord  what  he  did  not  see  fit  to  put  there. 
We  are  to  notice,  further,  that  Jesus  himself  ap])lies  the  parable  to 
Jesus'  own  ap-  the  disciples  by  his  words  of  counsel  and  exhortation  in 
plication.  vcrse  9,  and  makes  additional  comments  on  it  in  verses 

10-13.  These  comments  of  the  author  of  the  parable  are  to  be 
carefully  studied  as  containing  the  best  clue  to  his  meaning.  The 
main  lesson  is  given  in  verse  9,  where  the  disciples  are  urged  to 
imitate  the  prudence  and  wisdom  of  the  unjust  steward  in  making 
to  themselves  friends  out  of  unrighteous  mammon  (tTC  rov,  k.  t.  A., 
from  the  resources  and  opportunities  afforded  by  the  wealth,  or  the 
worldly  goods,  in  their  control).  The  steward  exhibited  in  his 
shrewd  plan  the  quick  sagacity  of  a  child  of  the  world,  and  knew 
well  how  to  inLjratiate  himself  with  the  men  of  his  own  kind  and 
generation.  In  this  respect  it  is  said  the  children  of  this  age  are 
wiser  than  the  children  of  the  light; '  therefore,  our  Lord  would  say, 

'  The  latter  part  of  verse  8  is,  literally,  "  Because  the  sons  of  this  age  are  wiser  than 
the  sons  of  the  light  in  reference  to  their  own  generation."  Not  in  their  generation, 
as  Authorized  Version,  l)ut  e'l^  tt/v  yeveuv  tijv  kavTU)v,  for  their  generation,  as  regards, 
or  in  relation  to,  their  own  generation.  "The  whole  body  of  the  children  of  the  world 
— a  category  of  liUe-niinded  men — is  described  as  a  generation,  a  clan  of  connexions, 
and  how  appropriately,  since  they  appear  precisely  as  vioi,  sons." — Meyer.  "The 
ready  accomplices  in  the  steward's  fraud  showed  themselves  to  be  men  of  the  same 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  299 

emulate  and  imitate  them  in  this  particular.  Similarly,  on  another 
occasion,  he  had  enjoined  upon  his  disciples,  when  they  were  sent 
forth  into  the  hostile  world,  to  be  wise  as  serpents  and  harmless  as 
doves  (Matt,  x,  16). 

So  fai'  ail  is  tolerably  clear  and  certain,  but  when  we  inquire 
Who  is  the  rich  man  (in  verse  1),  and  who  are  the  friends  who  re- 
ceive into  the  eternal  tabernacles  (verse  9),  we  find  great  diversity 
of  opinion  among  the  best  interpreters.  Usually  the  rich  man  has 
been  understood  of  God,  as  the  possessor  of  all  things,  who  uses  us 
as  his  stewards  of  whatever  goods  are  entrusted  to  our  care. 
Olshausen,  on  the  other  hand,  takes  the  rich  man  to  be  the  devil, 
considered  as  the  prince  of  this  world.  Meyer  explains  the  rich 
man  as  Mammon,  and  urges  that  verses  9  and  13  especially  require 
this  view.  It  will  be  seen  that  the  adoption  of  either  one  of  these 
views  will  materially  effect  our  exegesis  of  the  whole  parable. 
Here,  then,  especially,  we  need  to  make  a  most  careful  use  of  the 
second  and  third  hermeneutical  rules  afore  mentioned,  and  observe 
the  nature  and  properties  of  the  things  employed  as  imagery,  and 
interpret  them  with  strict  reference  to  the  great  central  thought 
and  to  the  general  scope  and  design  of  the  whole.  Our  choice 
would  seem  to  lie  between  the  common  view  and  that  of  Meyer; 
for  Olshausen's  explanation,  so  far  as  it  differs  essentially  from 
Meyer's,  has  nothing  in  the  text  to  make  it  even  plausible;  and  the 
other  views  (as  of  Schleiermacher,  who  makes  the  rich  man  repre- 
sent the  Romans,  and  Grossmann,  who  understands  the  Roman 
emperor)  have  still  less  in  their  favour.  The  common  exposition, 
which  takes  the  rich  man  to  be  God,  may  be  accepted  and  main- 
tained without  serious  difficulty.  The  details  of  the  parable  are 
then  to  be  explained  as  incidental,  designed  merely  to  exhibit  the 
shrewdness  of  the  unjust  steward,  and  no  other  analogies  are  to  be 
pressed.  The  disciples  are  urged  to  be  discreet  and  faithful  to  God 
in  their  use  of  the  unrighteous  mammon,  and  thereby  secure  the 
friendship  of  God,  Christ,  angels,  and  their  fellow  men,^  who  may 

generation  as  he  was — they  were  all  of  one  race,  children  of  the  ungodly  world." — 
Trench.  There  is  no  sufficient  reason  to  supply  the  thought,  or  refer  the  phrase, 
their  own  generation,  to  the  sons  of  light  (as  De  Wette,  Olshausen,  Trench,  and  many). 
If  that  were  the  thought  another  construction  could  easily  have  been  adopted  to  ex- 
press it  clearly.  As  it  stands,  it  means  that  the  children  of  light  do  not,  in  general, 
in  relation  to  themselves  or  others,  evince  the  prudence  and  sagacity  which  the  chil- 
dren of  the  world  know  so  well  how  to  use  in  their  relations  to  their  own  race  of 
worldlings. 

*  Some,  however,  who  adopt  this  exposition  in  general,  will  not  allow  that  God  or 
tlie  angels  are  to  be  understood  by  the  friends,  inasmuch  as  such  reference  would  not 
accord  strictly  with  the  analogy  of  the  parable. 


300  PRINCIPLES   OF 

all  be  thereby  disposed  to  receive  them,  when  the  goods  of  this 
world  fail,  into  the  eternal  habitations. 

But  the  interpretation  which  makes  the  rich  man  to  be  Mammon, 
The  rich  man  gives  a  special  point  and  force  to  several  noticeable 
stood^as^Mam-  I'emarks  of  Jesus,  maintains  a  self-consistency  within 
mon.  itself,  and  also  enforces  the  same  great  central  thought 

as  truly  as  the  other  exposition.  It  contemplates  the  disciples  as 
about  to  be  put  out  of  the  stewardship  of  Mammon,  and  admonishes 
them  to  consider  how  the  world  loves  its  own,  and  knows  how  to 
calculate  and  plan  wisely  {(ppoviiJ.(og)  for  personal  and  selfish  ends. 
Such  shrewdness  as  that  displayed  by  the  unjust  steward  calls  forth 
the  applause  of  even  Mammon  himself,  who  is  defrauded  by  the 
act.  But,  Jesus  says,  "  Ye  cannot  serve  God  and  Mammon."  Ye 
must,  in  the  nature  of  things,  be  unfaithful  to  the  one  or  the  other. 
If  ye  are  true  and  faithful  to  the  unrighteous  lord  Mammon,  ye 
cannot  be  sons  of  the  light  and  friends  of  God.  If,  on  the  other 
hand,  ye  are  unfaithful  to  Mammon,  he  and  all  his  adherents  will 
accuse  you,  and  ye  will  be  put  out  of  his  service.  What  will  ye 
do?  If  ye  would  secure  a  place  in  the  kingdom  of  God,  if  ye 
would  make  friends  now,  while  the  goods  of  unrighteous  Mammon 
are  at  your  control — friends  to  receive  and  welcome  you  to  the 
eternal  dwellings  of  light — ye  must  imitate  the  prudent  foresight 
of  the  unjust  steward,  and  be  unfaithful  to  Mammon  in  order  to 
be  faithful  servants  of  God.* 

The  scope  and  purport  of  the  parable,  as  evidenced  by  the  com- 
Geikie's  com-  ments  of  Jesus  (in  verses  9-13),  is  thus  set  forth  by 
™®°*^-  Geikio:  "By  becoming  my  disciples  you  have  identi- 

fied yourselves  with  the  interest  of  another  master  than  oMammon, 
the  god  of  this  world — whom  you  have  hitherto  served — and  have 
before  you  another  course  and  aim  in  life.  You  will  be  represented 
to  your  former  master  as  no  longer  faithful  to  him,  for  my  service 
is  so  utterly  opposed  to  that  of  Mammon,  that,  if  faithful  to  me, 
you  cannot  be  faithful  to  him,  and  he  will,  in  consequence,  assured- 
ly take  your  stewardship  of  this  world's  goods  away  from  you — 
that  is,  sink  you  in  poverty,  as  T  have  often  said.  I  counsel  you, 
therefore,  so  to  use  the  goods  of  Mammon — the  wordly  means  still 
at  your  command — that^by  a  truly  worthy  distribution  of  them  to 

'  Meyer  remarks  :  "  This  circumstance,  that  Jesus  sets  before  his  disciples  the  pru- 
dence ol  a  dishonest  pi'oceediug  as  an  example,  would  not  have  been  the  occasion  of 
such  unspeakable  misrepresentations  and  such  unrifihteous  judfjments  if  the  princi- 
jjle,  Ye  cannot  serve  God  and  Mammon,  (verse  I-',),  liad  been  kept  in  view,  and  it  had 
been  considered  accordingly  that  even  the  disciples,  in  fact,  by  beneficent  application 
of  tlieir  property,  must  have  acted  unfaithfully  toward  Maininou  in  order  to  be  faith- 
ful toward  their  contrasted  master,  toward  God." — Commentary,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL   HERME:N'EUTICS.  301 

your  needy  brethren — and  my  disciples  are  mostly  poor — you  may 
make  friends  for  yourselves,  who,  if  they  die  before  you,  will  wel- 
come you  to  everlasting  habitations  in  heaven,  when  you  pass  thith- 
er, at  death.  Fit  yourselves,  by  labours  of  love  and  deeds  of  true 
charity,  as  my  followers,  to  become  fellow  citizens  of  the  heavenly 
mansions  with  those  whose  wants  you  have  relieved  while  they 
were  still  in  life.  If  jon  be  faithful  thus,  in  the  use  of  your  pos- 
sessions on  earth,  you  will  be  deemed  worthy  by  God  to  be  en- 
trusted with  infinitely  greater  riches  hereafter.  ...  Be  assured 
that  if  you  do  not  use  your  earthly  riches  faithfully  for  God,  by 
dispensing  them  as  I  have  told  you,  you  will  never  enter  my  heav- 
enly kingdom  at  all.  You  will  have  shown  that  you  are  servants 
of  Mammon,  and  not  the  servants  of  God;  for  it  is  impossible  for 
any  man  to  serve  two  masters."  ' 

There  is  a  deep  inner  connexion  between  the  parable  of  the  un- 
just steward  and  that  of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus,  narrated  in  the 
same  chapter  (Luke  xvi,  19-31).  A  wise  faithfulness  toward  God 
in  the  use  of  the  mammon  of  unrighteousness  will  make  friends  to 
receive  us  into  eternal  mansions.  But  he  who  allows  himself,  like 
the  rich  man,  to  become  the  pampered,  luxury-loving  man  of  the 
world — so  true  and  faithful  to  the  interests  of  Mammon  that  he 
himself  becomes  an  impersonation  and  representative  of  the  god  of 
riches — will  in  the  world  to  come  lift  up  his  eyes  in  torments,  and 
learn  there,  too  late,  how  he  might  have  made  the  angels  and  Abra- 
ham and  Lazarus  friends  to  receive  him  to  the  banquets  of  the 
paradise  of  God. 

It  is  interesting  and  profitable  to  study  the  relation  of  the  par- 
ables to  each  other,  where  there  is  a  manifest  logical  connexion. 
This  we  noticed  in  the  seven  parables  recorded  in  Matt.  xiii.  It  is 
more  conspicuous  in  Luke  xv,  where  the  joy  over  the  recovery  of 
that  which  was  lost  is  enhanced  by  the  climax :  (1)  a  lost  sheep,  and 
one  of  a  hundred ;  (2)  a  lost  drachma,  and  one  out  of  ten ;  (3)  a  lost 
child,  and  one  out  of  two.  The  parables  of  the  ten  virgins  and  the 
talents  in  Matt,  xxv,  enjoin,  (1)  the  duty  of  loatching  for  the  com- 
ing of  the  Lord,  and  (2)  the  duty  of  working  for  him  in  his  absence. 
But  we  have  not  space  to  trace  the  details.  The  principles  and 
methods  of  interpreting  parables,  as  illustrated  in  the  foregoing- 
pages,  will  be  found  sufficient  guides  to  the  interpretation  of  all 
the  scriptural  parables. 

'  Geikie,  Life  of  Christ,  chap.  liii. 


302  PRINCIPLES    OF 


CHAPTER  XIY. 

ENTERPRETATION   OF    ALLEGORIES. 

An  allegory  is  usually  defined  as  an  extended  metaphor.     It  bears 
the  same  relation  to  the  parable  which  the  metaphor  does 

Allegory  to  be  ,      ,  ^  _        ,  ^ 

distinguished  to  the  simile.  In  a  parable  there  is  either  some  formal 
romParabe.  comparison  introduced,  as  "The  kingdom  of  heaven  is 
like  a  grain  of  mustard  seed,"  or  else  the  imagery  is  so  presented 
as  to  be  kept  distinct  from  the  thing  signified,  and  to  require  an 
explanation  outside  of  itself,  as  in  the  case  of  the  jDarable  of  the 
sower  (Matt,  xiii,  3,  ff.).  The  allegory  contains  its  interpretation 
within  itself,  and  the  thing  signified  is  identified  with  the  image; 
as  "  I  am  the  true  vine,  and  my  Father  is  the  husbandman  "  (John 
XV,  1);  "Ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth"  (Matt,  v,  13).  The  allegory 
is  a  figurative  use  and  application  of  some  supposable  fact  or  his- 
tory, whereas  the  parable  is  itself  such  a  supposable  fact  or  history. 
The  parable  uses  words  in  their  literal  sense,  and  its  narrative  never 
transgresses  the  limits  of  Avhat  might  have  been  actual  fact.  The 
allegory  is  continually  using  words  in  a  metaphorical  sense,  and 
its  narrative,  however  supposable  in  itself,  is  manifestly  fictitious. 
Hence  the  meaning  of  the  name,  from  the  Greek  dXXog,  other,  and 
ayoQEVio,  to  speak,  to  2:>rodai)n/  that  is,  to  say  another  thing  from 
that  which  is  meant,  or,  so  to  speak,  that  another  sense  is  expressed 
than  that  which  the  words  convey.  It  is  a  discourse  in  which  the 
main  subject  is  represented  by  some  other  subject  to  which  it  has  a 
resemblance.' 

Some  have  objected  to  calling  an  allegory  a  continued  metaphor." 

Who  shall  say,  they  ask,  where  the  one  ends  and  the 

AlIegoTT  IS   a  J  J  J  y 

continued  Met-  Other  begins?  But  the  very  definition  should  answer 
^P  ^^'  this  question.     When  the   metaphor  is   confined  to  a 

single  word  or  sentence  it  is  improper  to  call  it  an  allegory;  just 
as  it  is  improper  to  call  a  proverb  a  parable,  although  many  a  pro- 
verb is  a  condensed  parable,  and  is  sometimes  loosely  called  so  in 
the  Scriptures  (Matt,  xv,  14,  15).     But  when  it  is  extended  into  a 

'  "The  allegory,"  says  C'remcr,  "is  a  mode  of  exposition  which  does  not,  like  the 
parable,  hide  and  clothe  the  sense  in  order  to  give  a  clear  idea  of  it;  on  the  contrary, 
it  clothes  the  sense  in  order  to  hide  it." — Biblieo-Thcol.  Lex.  N.  Tost.,  p.  96. 

'  See  Davidson's  Ilermeneutics,  p.  300,  and  llorue's  Introduction,  vol.  ii,  p.  338. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  303 

narrative,  and  its  imagery  is  drawn  out  in  many  details  and  analo- 
gies, yet  so  as  to  accord  with  the  one  leading  figure,  it  would  be 
improper  to  call  it  a  metaphor.  It  is  also  affirmed  by  Davidson 
that  in  a  metaphor  there  is  only  one  meaning,  while  the  allegory 
has  two  meanings,  a  literal  and  a  figurative/  It  will  be  seen,  how- 
ever, on  careful  examination,  that  this  statement  is  misleading. 
Except  in  the  case  of  the  mystic  allegory  of  Gal.  iv,  21-31,  it  will 
be  found  that  the  allegory,  like  the  metaphor,  has  but  one  meaning. 
Take  for  example  the  following  from  Psalm  Ixxx,  8-15  : 

8  A  vine  from  Egypt  thou  hast  torn  away ; 
Thou  hast  cast  out  the  lieathen,  and  planted  it; 

9  Thou  didst  clear  away  before  it, 
And  it  rooted  its  roots, 

•  And  it  filled  the  land. 

10  Cove-red  were  the  mountains  with  its  shade, 
And  its  brandies  are  cedars  of  God. 

11  It  sent  out  its  boughs  unto  the  sea. 
And  unto  the  river  its  tender  shoots. 

12  Whei'efore  hast  thou  broken  down  its  walls, 
And  have  plucked  it  all  that  pass  over  the  road  ? 

13  Swine  from  the  forest  are  laying  it  waste, 
And  creatures  of  the  field  are  feeding  on  it. 

14  O  God  of  hosts,  return  now. 
Look  from  heaven,  and  behold. 
And  visit  this  vine  ; 

15  And  protect  what  thy  right  hand  has  planted, 
And  upon  the  son  thou  madest  strong  for  thyself. 

Surely  no  one  would  understand  this  allegory  in  a  literal  sense. 
No  one  supposes  for  a  moment  that  God  literally  took  a  vine  out  of 
Egypt,  or  that  it  had  an  actual  growth  elsewhere  as  here  described. 
The  language  throughout  is  metaphorical,  but  being  thus  continued 
under  one  leading  figure  of  a  vine,  the  whole  passage  becomes  an 
allegory.  The  casting  out  of  the  heathen  (verse  8)  is  a  momentary 
departure  from  the  figure,  but  it  serves  as  a  clue  to  the  meaning  of 
all  the  rest,  and  after  verse  15  the  writer  leaves  the  figure  entirely, 
but  makes  it  clear  that  he  identifies  himself  and  Israel  with  the 

'  Hermeneutics,  p.  306.  This  writer  also  says :  "  The  metaphor  always  asserts  or 
imagines  that  one  object  is  another.  Thus,  'Judah  is  a  lion's  whelp'  (Gen.  xlix,  9); 
'I  am  the  vine'  (John  xv,  1).  On  the  contrary,  allegory  never  affirms  that  one  thing 
is  another,  which  is  in  truth  an  absurdity."  But  the  very  passage  he  quotes  from 
John  XV,  1,  as  a  metaphor,  is  also  part  of  an  allegory,  which  is  continued  through  six 
verses,  showing  that  allegory  as  well  as  metaphor  may  affirm  that  one  thing  is  another. 
The  literal  meaning  of  the  word  allrffcry,  as  shown  above,  is  the  affirming  one  thing 
for  iinotlier. 


004  PRINCIPLES  OF 

vine.     The  same  imagery  is  given  in  the  form  of  a  parable  in  Isa. 

y,  1-6,  and  the  distinction  between  the  two  is  seen  in  this,  that  the 

^leaning  of  the  parable  is  given  separately  at  the  close  (verse  7), 

/   but  the  meaning  of  the  allegory  is  implied  in  the  metaphorical  use 

[  ijoi  its  words. 
'     Having  carefully  distinguished  between  the  parable  and  the  alle- 
gory, and  shown  that  the  allegory  is  essentially  an  extended  meta- 
phor, we  need  no  separate  and  special  rules  for  the  interpretation 
of  the  allegorical  portions  of  the  Scriptures.     The  same 

/    Same     herme-  &  i  -i    _  •  <• 

neuticai  prin-  general  principles  that  apply  to  the  mterjjretation  of 
AuSory  S  Jo  metaphors  and  parables  will  apply  to  allegories.  The 
Parable.  great  error  to  be  guarded  against  is  the  effort  to  find 

^  "^  Mnute^'^analogies  and  hidden  meanings  in  all  the  details  of  the 
imagery.  Hence,  as  in  the  case  of  parables,  we  should  first  deter- 
mine the  main  thought  intended  by  the  figure,  and  thexLJIlterpret 
the  minor  points  with  constant  reference  to  it.  The  context,  the 
occasion,  the  circumstances,  the  application,  and  often  the  accom- 
panying explanation,  are,  in  each  case,  such  as  to  leave  little  doubt 
of  the  import  of  any  of  the  allegories  of  the  Bible.  The  following 
passage  from  Prov.  v,  15-18  serves  to  exhibit  what  a  variety  of  in- 
terpretations may  attach  to  a  single  allegory: 

15  Drink  waters  from  thine  own  cistern, 

And  streams  from  the  midst  of  thiae  own  well. 

16  Sliall  thy  fountains  spread  abroad 
Brooks  of  water  in  the  streets? 

17  Let  them  l)e  for  thee,  by  thyself, 
And  not  for  strangers  with  thee. 

18  Let  thy  spring  be  lilest, 

And  have  joy  of  the  wife  of  thy  youth. 

Our  first  ini^uiry  should  be  as  to  the  main  purpose  of  the  alle- 

7  goi'y-     ^  clue  to  this  is  furnished  in  the  words  "  wife 
Main  purpose  ot    >=>     •'  n  „  .  .  .    » 

ihe  allegory  to  of  thy  youth  in  vcrse  18,  from  Which  we  might  infer, 
bougi .  j£  ^^g  |^,^^l  nothing  else  to  guide  us,  that  by  the  cistern, 
well,  etc.,  mentioned  before,  this  wife  is  to  be  understood.  But 
others  have  understood  the  well  to  mean  the  word  of  God  as  given 
in  the  Lavr  (Jerome,  Rashi),  others  true  wisdom  (C.  B.  Miehaelis), 
others  one's  own  possessions  in  goods  and  estate  (Junius,  Cornelius 
a  Lapide).  In  view  of  this  variety  of  opinions,  we  need  something 
more  than  the  single  allusion  to  the  wife  of  one's  youth  in  order  to 
determine  the  application  of  the  allegory.  But  when  we  further 
observe  that  the  entire  preceding  part  of  the  chapter  is  a  warning 
against  the  strange  woman,  and  the  subsequent  part  continues  in 
the  same  vein,  it  becomes  very  evident  that  the  allegory  of  verses 


BIBLICAL    IIERMENEUTICS.  305 

15-18  is  designed  to  enjoin  and  extol  connubial  fidelity  and  love,  as 
against  illicit  intercourse.  This  is  made  more  certain  by  the  lan- 
guage of  verse  19,  immediately  following,  in  which  the  figure 
changes,  and  the  youthful  wife  is  called  "  a  lovely  hind  and  a  grace- 
ful roe,"  which  metaphor  serves  as  an  elegant  transition  to  further 
warning  against  the  evil  woman.  The  great  majority  of  inter- 
preters, therefore,  ancient  and  modern,  have  adopted  this  view. 
Hence  we  observe  the  importance  of  consulting  the  context  in  order 
to  determine  the  main  purpose  of  an  allegory. 

But  having  determined  the  main  point  we  proceed  to  particulars, 
and  first  inquire  what  fitness  there  is  in  comparing  a  particular  ai- 
wife  to  a  fountain  of  waters.     Umbreit  answers :  "  The  lusions  to  be 

.J..  .,1  T-,1  r         .    •  .     Studied  In  the 

Wile  IS  appropriately  compared  witli  a  fountain,  not  ught  of  mam 
merely  inasmuch  as  offsjfring  are  born  of  her,  but  also  Pun)ose. 
because  she  satisfies  the  desire  of  the  man.  In  connexion  with  this 
we  must  call  to  mind,  in  oi'der  to  feel  the  full  power  of  the  figure, 
how  in  antiquity,  and  especially  in  the  East,  the  possession  of  a 
spring  was  regarded  as  a  great  and  even  sacred  thing."  '  This  be- 
ing accepted,  we  next  observe  that  there  are  five  different  Hebrew 
w^ords  here  vised  for  a  water  source,  which  we  have  translated  re- 
spectively by  cistern,  well,  fountain,  brook,  and  spring.  Any  at- 
tempt to  find  in  each  of  these  words  a  special  metaphorical  allusion 
would  be  pressing  particulars  too  far,  and  would  lead  to  confusion 
and  folly.  Familiarity  with  the  usages  of  Hebrew  parallelism  ^  will 
show  that  these  different  but  synonymous  terms  are  used  for  the 
sake  of  variety  and  rhetorical  effect,  and  are  not  to  be  pressed  in 
the  interpretation.  The  meaning  of  the  first  couplet  (verse  15), 
therefore,  is :  Be  content  with  the  waters  that  are  thine  own ;  find 
thy  delight  and  satisfaction  in  them,  and  go  not  abroad  to  meddle 
with  the  wells  and  cisterns  of  other  people.  That  is,  as  the  context 
has  shown,  be  satisfied  and  happy  with  thy  own  lawful  wife,  as  with 
a  precious  living  fountain  of  thine  own  possession,  and  go  not  in  the 
way  of  the  strange  woman. 

Verse  16  has  been  translated  variously;  (1)  afl[irmatively:  "thy 
fountains  shall  spread  abroad;"  (2)  imperatively:  "let  thy  foun- 
tains spread  abroad;"  (3)  interrogatively,  as  in  our  version  above. 
Some,  without  any  authority,  have  inserted  the  negative  particle, 
and  rendered,  "  thy  fountains  shall  not  be  spread  abroad  "  (Ewald, 
Bertheau,  Stuart).  This  bold  effort  to  amend  the  text  was  evi- 
dently prompted  by  the  feeling  that  the  aflfirmative  and  imperative 
renderings  (1  and  2  above)  made  the  author  contradict  himself. 
For  he  has  just  said,  Drink  of  thine  own  well,  and  in  verse  17  he 
'  Commentar  iiber  die  Spruche,  in  loco.  *  Compare  above,  pp.  95-99. 

20 


806  PRINCIPLES   OF 

adds,  Let  thy  fountains  be  for  thyself  alone,  and  not  for  strangers 
also.  How  could  he  then  say  that  these  fountains  should  spread 
and  become  rivulets  in  the  streets  ?  Many  of  the  older  interpret- 
ers, taking  the  sentence  aflBrmatively  or  imperatively,  understood, 
the  fountains  spreading  abroad  and  becoming  brooks  in  the  streets 
as  indicating  a  numerous  progeny  that  should  go  forth  and  be  hon- 
oured in  public  life.  Comp.  Num.  xxiv,  7;  Psa.  Ixviii,  26;  Isa. 
xlviii,  1;  li,  1.  But  this  conception  of  the  passage  would  seriously 
confuse  the  figure,  break  its  unity,  and  be  impossible  to  harmonize 
naturally  with  verse  17.  All  this  difficulty  is  avoided  by  adopting^ 
the  interrogative  form  of  translation:  ''Shall  thy  fountains  spread 
abroad,  (and  become)  brooks  of  water  in  the  streets?"  Wouldst 
thou  have  thy  wife  go  abroad  as  a  public  harlot  ?  Nay,  (but  as 
verse  17  adds)  let  her  be  for  thyself  alone,  and  not  for  sirangers 
Avith  thee.  In  these  last  two  verses  (16  and  17),  however,  some 
give  the  thought  a  more  general  turn,  as:  "Shall  the  fountains  at 
which  thou  drinkest  be  such  as  are  common  to  all  in  the  street  y  " 
But  it  gives  greater  unity  to  the  entire  allegory  to  keep  in  mind 
the  one  particular  wife  definitely  referred  to  at  the  close  (verse  18), 
and  suppose  the  question  to  imply  that  as  one  would  not  have 
his  own  wife  become  a  harlot  of  the  street,  so  he  should  keep  him- 
self only  unto  her  as  one  that  drinks  of  his  own  well. 

The  allegory  of  old  age,  in  Eccles.  xii,  3-7,  under  the  figure  of  a 
Allegory  of  old  ^^^"^^  about  to  fall  in  ruins,  has  been  variously  inter- 
age  in  Eccles.  preted.  Some  of  the  fathers  (Gregorj'^  Thaumaturgus, 
^^''''"  Cyril  of  Jerusalem)   understood  the   whole  passage  as 

referring  to  the  day  of  judgment  as  connected  with  the  end  of 
the  Avorld.  Accordingly,  "  the  day  "  of  verse  3  would  be  "  the  great 
and  terrible  day  of  the  Lord"  (Joel  ii,  31;  comp.  Matt,  xxiv,  2'J). 
Other  expositors  (L^mbreit,  Elster,  Ginsburg)  regard  the  passage  as 
describing  the  approach  of  death  under  the  figure  of  a  fearful 
tempest  which  strikes  the  inmates  of  a  noble  mansion  with  conster- 
nation and  terror.  But  the  great  majority  of  expositors,  ancient  and 
modern,  liave  understood  the  passage  as  an  allegorical  descrijition 
of  old  age.  And  this  view,  we  may  safely  say,  is  favoured  and  even 
required  by  the  immediate  context  and  by  the  imagery  itself.  But 
v»-e  lose  much  of  its  point  and  force  by  understanding  it  of  old  ago 
generally.  It  is  not  a  truthful  portraiture  of  the  peaceful,  serene, 
honoured,  and  "  good  old  age  "  so  much  extolled  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. It  is  not  the  picture  presented  to  the  mind  in  Prov.  xvi,  31: 
"A  crown  of  glory  is  the  hoary  head;  in  the  way  of  righteousness 
will  it  be  found;"  nor  that  of  Psa.  xcii,  12-14,  where  it  is  declared 
that  the  righteous  shall  flourish  like  the  palm,  and  grow  great  like 


BIBLICAL    HER:\IENEUTICS.  307 

the  Lebanon  cedars;  "they  shall  still  bear  fruit  in  hoary  aG;e' 
fresh  and  green  shall  they  be."  Comp.  also  Isa.  xl,  30,  31,  It  re- 
mains for  us,  then,  with  Tayler  Lewis,  to  understand  that  "the 
picture  here  given  is  the  old  age  of  the  sensualist.  This  appears, 
too,  from  the  connexion.  It  is  the  '  evil  time,'  the  '  day  of  dark- 
ness' that  has  come  upon  the  youth  who  was  warned  in  the  lan- 
guage  above,  made  so   much   more  impressive  bv  its 

7  f    f  .-  •  T.     -IT  ,,  It  is  the  old  age 

tone  of  forecasting  irony.  It  is  the  dreary  old  age  of  of  tbe  sensuai- 
the  young  man  who  xoould  '  go  on  in  every  way  of  his  *^*" 
heart  and  after  every  sight  of  his  eyes,'  Avho  did  not  '  keep  remorse 
from  his  soul  nor  evils  from  his  flesh,'  and  now  all  these  things  are 
come  upon  him,  with  no  such  alleviations  as  often  accompany  the 
decline  of  life.  Such  also  might  be  the  inference  from  the  words 
with  which  the  verse  begins:  '  Remember  thy  Creator  xohile  the 
evil  days  come  not.'  It  expresses  this  and  more.  There  is  a  nega- 
tive prohibitory  force  in  the  N^  "iL'*n;  ly:  So  remember  Him  that  the 
evil  days  come  not — implying  a  warning  that  such  coming  will  be  a 
consequence  of  the  neglect.  Piety  in  youth  will  prevent  such  a 
realizing  of  this  sad  picture;  it  will  not  keep  off  old  age,  but  it  will 
make  it  cheerful  and  tolerable  instead  of  the  utter  ruin  that  is  here 
depicted." ' 

Passing  now  to  the  particular  figures  used,  we  should  exercise 
the  greatest  caution  and  care,  for  some  of  the  allusions  Doubtful  aiiu- 
seem  almost  to  be  enigmatical.  Barely  to  name  the  ^^"°^- 
different  interpretations  of  the  several  parts  of  this  allegory  would 
require  many  pages.^  But  the  most  judicious  and  careful  interpret- 
ers are  agreed  that  the  "  keepers  of  the  house "  (verse  3)  are  the 
arms  and  hands,  which  serve  for  protection  and  defence,  but  in  de- 
crepit age  become  feeble  and  tremulous.  The  "strong  men  "  are 
the  legs,  which,  when  they  lose  their  muscular  vigour,  become 
bowed  and  crooked  in  supporting  their  wearisome  load.  "  The 
grinders,"  or  rather  grindinr/  maids  (nijnb  fem.  plural  in  allusion  to 
the  fact  that  grinding  with  hand  mills  was  usually  performed  by 
women),  are  the  teeth,  which  in  age  become  few  and  cease  to  per- 
form their  work.  "  Those  that  behold  in  the  windows  "  are  the 
eyes,  which  become  dim  with  years.  Beyond  this  point  the  inter- 
pretations become  much  more  various  and  subtle.  "  The  doors  into 
the  street "  (verse  4)  are  generally  explained  of  the  mouth,  the  two 
lips  .of  which  are  conceived  of  as  double  doors  (Heb.  n)Ti7"n),  or  a 
door  consisting  of  two  sides  or  leaves.  But  it  would  seem  better 
to  understand  these  double  doors  of  the  two  ears,  which  become 

'  American  edition  of  Lange's  Commentary  on  Ecclesia?tes,  pp.  ITi'J,  l.'SS. 
'  See  Poole's  Synopsis,  in  loco. 


308  PRINCIPLES   OF 

shut  up  or  closed  to  outer  sounds.  So  Hengstcnberg  explains  it, 
and  is  followed  by  Tayler  Lewis,  who  observes:  "The  old  sensual- 
ist, who  had  lived  so  much  abroad  and  so  little  at  home,  is  shut  in 
at  last.  With  no  propriety  could  the  mouth  be  called  the  street 
door,  through  which  the  master  of  the  house  goes  abroad.  ...  It 
is  rather  the  door  to  the  interior,  the  cellar  door,  that  leads  down 
to  the  stored  or  consumed  provision,  the  stomach."  '  The  "  sound 
of  the  grinding"  is  by  many  referred  to  the  noise  of  the  teeth  in 
masticating  food;  but  this  would  be  a  return  to  what  has  been  suf- 
ficiently noticed  in  verse  3.  Better  to  understand  this  sound  of  the 
mill  as  equivalent  to  "the  most  familiar  household  sounds,"  as  the 
sound  of  the  mill  really  was.  The  thought  then  connects  naturally 
with  what  precedes  and  follows;  the  ears  are  so  shut  up,  the  hear- 
ing has  become  so  dull,  that  the  most  familiar  sounds  are  but  faint- 
ly heard,^  "  and,"  he  adds,  "  it  rises  to  the  sound  of  the  sparrow ; " 
that  is,  as  most  recent  critics  explain,  the  "sound  of  the  grinding" 
rises  to  that  of  a  sparrow's  shrill  cry,  and  yet  this  old  man's  organs 
of  hearing  are  so  dull  that  he  scarcely  hears  it.  Others  explain 
this  last  clause  of  the  wakefulness  of  the  old  man:  "he  rises  up  at 
the  voice  of  the  spaiTow."  Thus  rendered,  we  need  not,  as  many, 
understand  it  of  rising  or  waking  up  early  in  the  morning  (in  which 
case  the  Hebrew  word  liy  rather  than  Dip  should  have  been  used), 
but  of  restlessness.  Though  dull  of  hearing,  he  will,  nevertheless, 
at  times  start  and  rise  up  at  the  sound  of  a  sparrow's  shrill  note. 
"  The  daughters  of  song  "  may  be  understood  of  the  women  singers 
(chap,  ii,  8)  who  once  ministered  to  his  hilarity,  but  whose  songs 
can  now  no  longer  charm  him,  and  they  are  therefore  humbled. 
;  But  it  is,  perhaps,  better  to  understand  the  voice  itself,  the  various 
tones  qf  Avhich  become  low  and  feeble  (comp.  the  use  of  nni^  in  Isa. 
xxix,  4). 

As  we  pass  to  verse  5  we  note  the  peculiar  nature  of  allegory  to 
The  allegory  interweave  its  interpretation  with  its  imagery.  The 
InTwml'il"''?,.'!"  figin"^^  of  a  house  is  for  the  time  abandoned,  and  we 

I  ii^^  vv  nil  lis  liU-        ^^  ' 

iiKery.  read:  "Also  from  a  height  they  are  afraid,  and  terrors 

are  in  the  way,  and  the  almond  disgusts,  and  the  locust  becomes 
heavy,  and  the  caperberry  fails  to  produce  effect;  for  going  is  the 

'  Lange's  Commentary  on  Ecclesiastes  (Am.  ed.),  p.  155. 

^Tliere  was  liardly  any  part  of  the  day  or  night  when  this  work  was  not  eoyig  on 
with  its  ceaseless  noise.  It  was,  indeed,  a  sign  that  the  senses  were  lailiiig  in  their 
office  wiien  tliis  familiar,  yet  very  peculiar,  sound  of  the  grinding  bad  ceased  to  arrest 
the  attention,  or  hud  become  low  and  oljscinc — 

When  the  hum  of  th(^  mill  is  faiutly  heard, 

And  the  daughters  of  sonK  ;'.rc  stiil.  — Ibid.,  ]).  156. 


BIBLICAL   lIERxAlENEUTICS.  309 

man  to  his  everlasting  house,  and  round  about  in  the  street  pass  the 
mourners."  That  is,  looking  down  from  that  which  is  high,  the  tot- 
tering old  man  quickly  becomes  dizzy  and  is  afraid;  terrors  seem 
to  be  continually  in  his  path  (comp.  Pro  v.  xxii,  13;  xxvi,  13);  the 
almond  is  no  longer  pleasant  to  his'  taste,  but,  on  the  contrary,  dis- 
gusts;' and  the  locust,  once  with  him  perhaps  a  dainty  article  of 
food  (Lev.  xi,  22 ;  Matt,  iii,  4 ;  Mark  i,  6),  becomes  heavy  and 
nauseating  in  his  stomach,  and  the  caperberry  no  longer  serves  its 
purpose  of  stimulating  appetite. 

In  verse  6  we  meet  again  with  other  figures  which  have  a  nat- 
ural association  with  the  lordly  mansion.  The  end  of  life  is  repre- 
seiited  as  a  removing  (pni)  or  sundering  of  the  silver  cord  and  a 
breaking  of  the  golden  lampbowl.  The  idea  is  that  of  a  golden  lamp 
suspended  by  a  silver  cord  in  the  palatial  hall,  and  suddenly  the  bowl 
of  the  lamp  is  dashed  to  pieces  by  the  breaking  of  the  cord.  The 
pitcher  at  the  fountain  and  the  wheel  at  the  cistern  are  similar 
metaphors  referring  to  the  abundant  machinery  for  drawing  water 
which  would  be  connected  with  the  mansion  of  a  sumptuous  Dives. 
These  at  last  give  out,  and  the  whole  furniture  and  machinery  of 
life  fall  into  sudden  ruin.  The  explaining  of  the  silver  cord  as  the 
spinal  marrow,  and  the  golden  bowl  as  the  brain,  and  tlie  fountain 
and  cistern  as  the  right  and  left  ventricles  of  the  heart,  seems  too 
far  fetched  to  be  safe  or  satisfactory.  Such  minute  and  ramified 
explanations  of  particular  figures  are  always  likely  to  be  overdone, 
and  generally  confuse  rather  than  illustrate  the  main  idea  whicii 
the  author  had  in  mind.  The  words  of  verse  7  show  that  the  met- 
aphors of  verse  6  refer  to  the  utter  breaking  down  of  the  functions 
and  processes  of  life.  The  pampered  old  body  falls  a  pitiable  ruin, 
in  view  of  which  Koheleth  repeats  his  cry  of  "vanity  of  vanities." 

In  the  interj^retation  of  an  allegory  so  rich  in   suggestions  as   . 
the   above,  the  great   hermeneutical   principles   to  be   Hgpmgjjgyti(.ai 
carefully  adhered  to  are,  first,  to  grasp  the  one^reat  principles  lo  be 
idea^of_  the  AvhoTe  passage,  and,  second,  to  avoid  the      ^^^^"^  ' 

'  r^^^N  Hiphil  of  VSJ,  and  meaning  to  cause  dixgtist,  or  is  despised.  The  old  ver- 
sions  and  most  interpreters  render  shall  flourish,  deriving  the  form  from  ]*:iJ,  and 
understand  the  silvery  hair  of  the  old  man  as  resembling  the  almond-tree,  which 
blossoms  in  winter,  and  its  flowers,  which  at  first  are  roseate  in  colour,  become  white 
like  snowflakes  before  they  fall  off.  But,  aside  from  this  doubtful  derivation  of  the 
form  •'X:''  (Stuart  affirms  that  "  ]'Xr  for  |'J>  has  no  parallel  in  Hebrew  orthogra- 
phy "),  the  immediate  connexion  is  against  the  introduction  of  such  an  image  as  the 
silvery  hair  of  age  in  this  place.  The  'loary  head  can  only  be  thought  of  as  a  crown 
of  glory — a  beautiful  sight ;  but  to  introduce  it  between  the  mention  of  the  old  man's 
fears  and  terrors  on  the  one  side,  and  the  disturbing  locust  on  the  other,  would  make 
a  most  unhappy  confusion  of  images. 


310  PRINCIPLES   OF 

temptation  of  seeking  manifold  meanings  in  the  particular  figures. 
Bv  the  minute  search  for  some  special  significance  in  eveiy  allusion 
the  mind  becomes  wearied  and  overcrowded  with  the  particular 
illustrations,  so  as  to  be  likely  to  miss  entirely  the  great  thought 
which  should  be  kept  mainly  in  view. 

The  work  of  the  false  prophets  in  Israel,  and  the  ruin  of  both  it 
Rnin  of  false  ^"<^  them,  are  set  forth  allegorically  in  Ezek.  xiii,  10-15. 
prophets  aiie-  The  people  are  represented  as  building  a  wall,  and  the 
Ezek!^xiii,  10-  prophets  as  plastering  it  over  with  ?Dri,  a  sort  of  coat- 
^^-  ing  or  whiteAvash  (comp.  Matt,  xxiii,  27;  Acts  xxiii,  3), 

desiorned  to  cover  the  worthless  material  of  which  the  Mall  is 
built,  and  also  to  hide  its  unsafe  construction,  Ewald  observes 
that  this  word  (^2ri)  denotes  elsewhere  what  is  absurd  intellect- 
ual! v,  what  is  inconsistent  with  itself;  here  the  mortar  which  does 
not  hold  together,  clay  without  straw,  or  dry  clay.'  The  mean- 
ing of  these  figures  is  very  clear.  The  people  built  up  vain  hopes, 
and  the  false  prophets  covered  them  over  with  deceitful  words  and 
promises;  they  '"saw  vanity  and  divined  a  lie"  (verses  7  and  9). 
The  ruin  of  wall  and  plastering  and  plasterers  is  announced  by  Je- 
hovah's oracle  as  fearfully  effected  by  an  overwhelming  rain  of 
judgment;  the  rain  is  accompanied  by  falling  hailstones  and  a  vio- 
lent rushing  tempest;  all  these  together  hurl  wall  and  plastering  to 
the  ground,  expose  the  false  foundations,  and  utterly  destroy  the 
lying  prophets  in  the  general  ruin.  Here  we  have,  in  the  form  of 
an  allegory,  or  extended  metaphor,  the  same  image,  substantially, 
Avhicli  our  Lord  puts  in  the  form  of  a  simile  at  the  close  of  the  ser- 
mon on  the  mount  (Matt,  vii,  26,  27)." 

The  much-disputed  passage  in  1  Cor.  iii,  10-15,  is  an  allegory. 
Allegory  of  111  the  preceding  context  Paul  represents  himself  and 
wise  and  uu-     ^pollos  as  the  ministers  through  whom  the   Corinth- 

wiAQ     master-        l  » 

i.uiiding.  ians    had    believed.       '- 1    planted,    Apollos    watered; 

:>at  God  gave  the  increase"  (ver.  6).  He  shows  his  appreci- 
ation of  the  honour  and  responsibility  of  such  ministry  by  saying 
(ver.  n):  "For  we  (apostles  and  ministers  like  Paul  and  Apollos) 

■Die  Propheten  des  Alton  Buiules,  vol.  ii,  p.  399.     Gottingen,  1868. 

-Tlie  prophecies  of  Ezekiel  abound  in  allegory.  Chapter  xvi  contains  an  allcgor- 
Lvil  liistory  of  Israel,  representing,  by  way  of  narrative,  prophecy,  and  promise,  the 
past,  present,  and  futnre  relations  of  God  and  the  chosen  people,  and  maintaining 
t!r.-oughout  the  general  figure  of  the  marriage  relation.  Under  like  imagery,  in  chap- 
ter xxiii,  the  jjioplict  depicts  tlie  idolatries  of  Samaria  and  Jerusalem.  Compare  also 
the  similitudes  of  the  vine  wood  and  the  vine  in  chapters  xv  and  xix,  10-14,  and  the 
allegory  of  the  lioness  and  her  whelps  in  xix,  1-9.  The  allegorical  history  of  As- 
syria, in  chapter  xxxi,  may  also  be  profitably  compared  and  contrastcil  with  the  enig- 
matical fable  of  chapter  xvii. 


BIBLICAL    IIERMENEUTICS.  311 

are  God's  fellow  workers,"  and  then  he  adds:  "God's  tilled  field 
[yeojpyiov,  in  allusion  to,  and  in  harmony  with,  the  platiting  and 
watering  mentioned  above),  God's  building,  are  ye."  Then  drop- 
ping the  former  figure,  and  taking  up  that  of  a  building  {olnodojXTi), 
he  proceeds: 

According  to  the  grace  of  GotJ  wliicli  was  e'iven  unto  me,  as  a  wise  ardi- 
itect,  I  laid  a  foundation,  and  another  is  building  thereon.  But  let  each 
man  take  heed  how  he  buiUls  thereon.  For  other  foundation  can  no  man 
lay  than  the  one  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ.  But  if  any  one  builds  on  the 
foundation  gold,  silver,  precious  stones,  wood,  hay,  stubble;  each  mnn's 
work  shall  be  made  manifest,  for  the  day  will  make  it  known,  because  in 
fire  it  is  revealed,  and  each  man's  work,  of  what  sort  it  is,  the  fire  itself 
will  prove.  If  any  one's  work  shall  endure  wliich  he  built  thereon,  he 
iihall  receive  reward.  If  any  one's  work  shall  be  burned,  he  shall  suffer 
loss,  but  he  himself  shall  be  saved,  yet  so  as  through  fire. 

The  greatest  trouble  in  explaining  this  passage  has  been  to  deter- 
mine what  is  meant  by  the  "  gold,  silver,  precious  stones, 

Arc    lDO    II1B.lG— 

wood,  hay,  stubble,"  in  verse  12.  According  to  the  rials  persons  or 
majority  of  commentators  these  materials  denote  doc-  ^°^^^'^^^^- 
triiies  supposed  to  be  taught  in  the  Church.^  Many  others,  how- 
ever, understand  the  character  of  the  j^'^'^sons  brought  into  the 
Church.^  But  the  most  discerning  among  those  who  understand 
doctrines,  do  not  deny  that  the  doctrines  are  such  as  interpen- 
etrate and  mould  character  and  life;  and  those  who  understand 
persons  are  as  ready  to  admit  that  the  personal  character  of  those 
referred  to  would  be  influenced  and  developed  by  the  doctrines  of 
their  ministers.  Probably  in  this,  as  in  some  other  Scripture, 
where  so  many  devout  and  critical  minds  have  differed.  Both  views  ai- 
the  real  exposition  is  to  be  found  in  a  blending  of  botli  lowabie. 
views.  The  Church,  considered  as  God's  building,  is  a  frequent 
figure  with  Paul  (comp.  Eph.  ii,  20-22;  Col.  ii,  7;  also  1  Peter  ii,  5), 
and  in  every  case  it  is  the  Christian  believer  who  is  conceived  as 
builded  into  the  structure.  So  here  Paul  says  to  the  Corinthians, 
"  Ye  are  God's  building,''  and  it  comports  fully  wnth  this  figure  to 
understand  that  the  material  of  which  this  building  is  to  be  con- 
structed consists  of  persons  who  accept  Christ  in  faith.  The 
Church  is  builded  of  persons,  not  of  doctrines,  bitt  the  persons  are  ' 
not  brought  to  such  use  without  doctrine.     As  in  the  case  of  Peter, 

'  So  Clemens  Alexandrinus,  Ambrosiaster,  Lyra,  Cajetan,  Erasmus,  Luther,  Beza,  Cal- 
vin, Piseator,  Grotius,  Estius,  Calovius,  Lightfoot,  Stolz,  Rosenniuller,  Flatt,  Heiden- 
reich,  Xeunder,  De  Wette,  Ewald,  Meyer,  Hodge,  Alford,  and  Kling. 

*So,  substantially,  Origan,  Chrysostom,  Photius,  Theodoret,  Theophylact,  Augustine, 
Jerome,  Billroth,  Beiigel,  Pott,  and  Stanley. 


/ 


313  PRINCIPLES   OF 

the  stone  (Matt,  xvi,  18),  the  true  material  of  which  the  abiding; 
Church  is  built,  is  not  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  or  the  confession  of 
Christ  put  forth  by  Peter,  nor  yet  Peter  considered  as  an  individual 
man  (nirpog),  but  both  of  these  combined  in  jPeter  confessing — a 
believer  inspired  of  God  and  confessing  Christ  as  the  Son  of  the 
living  God — thus  making  one  new  man,  the  ideal  and  representa- 
tive confessor  (Trerpa),'  so  the  material  here  contemplated  consists  of 
persons  made  and  fashioned  into  various  character  through  the  in- 
strumentality of  different  ministers.  These  ministers  are  admon- 
ished that  they  may  work  into  God's  building  "  wood,  hay,  stul»ble," 
worthless  and  perishable  stuff,  as  well  as  "  gold,  silver,  precious 
stones."  The  material  may  be  largely  made  what  it  is  by  the  doc- 
\  trines  taught,  and  other  influences  brought  to  bear  on  converts  by 
the  minister  who  is  to  build  tliem  into  tlie  house  of  God,  but  is  it 
not  clear  that  in  such  case  the  doctrines  taught  are  -the  tools  of  t] 


AvoiJtfiuuiu:ath£ll--Lhaji.  the  material  of  which  hejbuilds  ?  Neverthe- 
less, this  process  of  building  [k-noiKo6ofiEi)  on  the  foundation  ah'eady 
laid,  like  the  work  of  Apollos  in  watering  that  which  was  planted 
by  Paul  (ver.  G),  is  to  be  thought  of  chiefly  in  reference  to  the  re- 
sponsibilitt/  of  the  ministers  of  the  Gospel.  The  great  caution  is: 
"  Let  each  man  (whether  Apollos  or  Cephas,  or  any  other  minister) 
take  heed  how  he  builds  thereon"  (ver.  10).  Let  him  take  heed  to 
the  doctrine  he  preaches,  the  morality  he  inculcates,  the  discipline 
he  maintains,  and,  indeed,  to  every  influence  he  exerts,  which  goes 
in  any  way  to  mould  and  fashion  the  life  and  character  of  tiiose 
who  are  builded  into  the  Church.  Tlie  gold,  silver,  and  precious 
stones,  according  to  Alford,  "  refer  to  the  matter  of  the  minister's 
teaching,  primarily,  and  by  inference  to  those  whom  that  teaching 
penetrates  and  builds  up  in  Christ,  who  should  be  the  living  stones 
of  the  temple."'  So  also  Meyer:  "The  various  specimens  of 
building  materials,  set  side  by  side  in  vivid  asyndeton,  denote  the 
various  matters  of  doctrine  propounded  by  teachers  and  brought 
into  connexion  with  faith  in  Christ,  in  order  to  develop  and  com- 
plete the  Christian  training  of  the  Church." '  These  statements 
contain  essential  truth,  but  they  are,  as  we  conceive,  misleading,  in 
so  far  as  they  exalt  matters  of  doctrine  alone.  We  are  rather  to 
think  of  the  whole  administration  and  work  of  the  minister  in  mak- 
ing converts  and  influencing  their  character  and  life.  The  mate- 
rials are  rather  the  Churcli  members,  but  considered  primarily  as 
made,  or  allowed  to  remain  what  they  are  by  the  agency  of  the 
V    minister  who  builds  the  Church. 

'  See  on  this  subject  above,  pp.  228,  229.  2  Greek  Testament,  in  loco. 

*  Critical  Commcntaiv  on  Corinthi.ins,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  US 

Tlie  great  thoughts  in  the  passage,  then,  wouhl  be  as  follows: 
On  the  foundation  of  Jesus  Christ,  ministers,  as  fellow  xtie  passage 
workers  with  God,  are  engaged  in  building  up  God's  paraphrased. 
house.  But  let  each  man  take  heed  how  he  builds.  On  that 
foundation  may  be  erected  an  edifice  of  sound  and  enduring  sub- 
stance, as  if  it  were  built  of  gold,  silver,  and  precious  stones  (as,  for 
instance,  costly  marbles);  the  kind  of  Christians  thus  "builded  to- 
gether for  a  habitation  of  God  in  the  Spirit "  (EjdIi.  ii,  20)  will  con- 
stitute a  noble  and  enduring  structure,  and  his  work  will  stand  the 
fiery  test  of  the  last  day.  But  on  that  same  foundation  a  careless 
and  unfaithful  workman  may  build  with  unsafe  material;  he  may 
tolerate  and  even  foster  jealousy,  and  strife  (ver.  3),  and  pride 
(iv,  18);  he  may  keep  fornicators  in  the  Church  without  sorrow  or 
compunction  (v,  1,  2);  he  may  allow  brother  to  go  to  law  against 
brother  (vi,  1),  and  permit  drunken  persons  to  come  to  the  Lord's 
Supper  (xi,  21) — all  these,  as  well  as  heretics  in  doctrine  (xv,  12), 
may  be  taken  up  and  used  as  materials  for  building  God's  house.' 
In  writing  to  the  Corinthians  the  apostle  had  all  these  classes  of 
persons  in  mind,  and  saw  how  they  were  becoming  incorporated 
into  that  Church  of  his  own  planting.  But  he  adds:  The  day  of 
the  Lord's  judgment  will  bring  every  thing  to  light,  and  put  to  the 
test  every  man's  work.  The  fiery  revelation  wall  disclose  what 
sort  of  work  each  one  has  been  doing,  and  he  that  has  builded  wise- 
ly and  soundly  will  obtain  a  glorious  reward;  but  he  that  has 
brought,  or  sought  to  keep,  the  wood,  hay,  stubble,  in  the  Church 
— he  who  has  not  rebuked  jealousy,  nor  put  down  strife,  nor  ex- 
communicated fornicators,  nor  faithfully  administered  the  discipline 
of  the  Church— shall  see  his  life-work  all  consumed,  and  he  himself 
shall  barely  escape  with  his  life,  as  one  that  is  saved  by  being  has- 
tened through  the  fire  of  the  burning  building.  His  labour  will  all 
have  been  in  vain,  though  he  assumed  to  build  on  Christ,  and  did 
in  fact  minister  in  the  holy  place  of  his  temple. 

It  is  to  be  especially  ke])t  in  mind  that  this  allegory  is  intended 
to  serve  rather_aa  a  warnina  than  to  be  understood  as   The  aiiegrory  a 

.         ,  ,  ,  f    ,1        T   1  "       +1,^    warniiis? rather 

a  prophecy.  As  the  parable  of  the  labourers  m  tne  ^^^^  ^  y.x^v'^- 
vineyard  (Matt,  xix,  27-xx,  16)  is  spoken  against  Pe-  ecy. 
ter's  mercenary  spirit,  and  thus  serves  as  a  warning  and  rebuke 
rather  than  as  a  prophecy  of  w-hat  will  actually  take  place  in  the 
judgment,  so  here  Paul  warns  those  who  are  fellow  labourers  with 
God  to  take  heed  how  they  build,  lest  they  involve  both  themselves 
and  others  in  irreparable  loss.     We  are  not  to  understand  the  wood, 

»In  his  parable  of  the  tares  and  the  wheat  (Matt,  xiii,  24-30,  37-43)  Jesus  himself 
taught  that  the  good  and  the  ovil  would  be  mixed  together  in  the  Church. 


314  PRINCIPLES    OF 

hay,  stubble,  as  tlie  prof ;uk'  and  ungodly,  who  have  no  faith  in 
Christ.  Nor  do  these  words  denote  false,  anti-Christian  doc- 
trines. They  denote  rather  the  character  and  life-work  of  those 
who  are  rooted  and  grounded  in  Christ,  but  whose  personal  char- 
— ^  acter  and  work  are  of  little  or  no  worth  in  the  Church.  All  such 
persons,  as  well  as  the  ministers  who  helped  to  make  them  such, 
will  suffer  in-eparable  loss  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  although 
they  themselves  may  be  saved.  And  this  consideration  obviates 
the  objection  made  by  some  that  if  the  work  which  shall  be  burned 
{ver.  15)  are  the  persons  brought  into  the  Church,  it  is  not  to  be 
supposed'  that  the  ministers  w'ho  brought  them  in  shall  be  saved. 
The  final  destiny  of  the  persons  affected  by  this  work  is,  no  doubt, 
necessarily  involved  in  the  fearful  issue,  but  for  their  ruin  the  care- 
less minister  may  not  have  been  solely  responsible.  He  may  be 
saved,  yet  so  as  through  fire,  and  they  be  lost.  In  chapter  v,  5, 
Paul  enjoins  the  severest  discipline  of  the  vile  fornicator  "  in  order 
that  the  spirit  might  be  saved  in  the  day  of  the  Lord."  But  a 
failure  to  administer  such  discipline  would  not  necessarily  have  in- 
volved the  final  I'uin  of  those  commissioned  to  administer  it;  they 
would  "  suffer  loss,"  and  their  final  salvation  would  be  "  as  through 
fire."  So,  on  the  other  hand,  the  work  which  the  wise  architect 
builds  on  the  true  foundation  (ver,  14),  and  which  endures,  is  not  so 
much  the  final  salvation  and  eternal  life  of  those  whom  he  brought 
into  the  Church  and  trained  there  as  the  general  character  and  re- 
sults of  his  labour  in  thus  bringing  them  in  and  training  them. 

We  thus  seek  the  true  solution  of  this  allegory  in  carefully  dis- 
tinguishing betw^een  the  matericds  put  into  the  building  and  the 
^ocrk  of  the  builders,  and,  at  the  same  time,  note  the  essential 
blending  of  the  two.  The  wise  builder  Avill  so  teach,  train,  and  dis- 
cipline the  church  in  which  he  labours  as  to  secure  excellent  and 
'  permanent  results.  The  unwise  will  work  in  bad  material,  and 
liave  no  regard  for  the  judgment  which  will  test  the  work  of  all. 
In  thus  building,  whether  wisely  or  unwisely,  the  persons  brought 
into  the  church  and  the  ministerial  labour  by  which  they  are  taught 
and  disciplined  have  a  most  intimate  relation ;  and  hence  the  essen- 
tial truth  in  both  the  expositions  of  the  allegory  which  have  been 
so  widely  maintained. 

Another  of  Paul's  allegories  occurs  in  1  Cor.  v,  6-8.  Its  imagery 
AHegory  of  ^^  bascd  upon  the  Avell-known  custom  of  the  Jews  of  re- 
icor.  V,  G-8.  moving  all  leaven  h\nn  their  houses  at  the  beginning  of 
the  passover  week,'  and  allowing  no  leaven  to  be  found  there  during 

'  Till'  ■•Mu'i'in  niny  liavo  been  sufrpested  by  the  time  of  the  year  when  the  epistlo 
w-<  "-itrc  \  .•';;;):ntMitly  (c'h:i;i.  xvi,  8)  ii  short  time  before  Penteeost,  and,  therefore, 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  315 

the  seven  days  of  the  feast  (Exod.  xii,  15-20;  xiii,  7).  It  also  as- 
sumes the  knowledge  of  the  working  of  leaven,  and  its  nature  to 
communicate  its  properties  of  sourness  to  the  whole  kneaded  mass. 
Jesus  had  used  leaven  as  a  symbol  of  pharisaic  hypocrisy  (Matt, 
xvi,  6,  12;  Mark  viii,  15;  Luke  xii,  1),  and  the  power  of  a  little 
leaven  to  leaven  the  whole  lump  had  become  a  proverb  (Gal.  v,  9 ; 
comp.  1  Cor.  xv,  33).  All  this  Paul  constructs  into  the  following 
allegory : 

Know  ye  not  that  a  little  leaven  leavens  the  whole  lump  ?  Purge  out 
the  old  leaven,  that  ye  may  be  a  new  lump,  even  as  ye  are  vuileavened. 
For  our  passover,  also,  has  been  sacrificed,  even  Christ;  wherefore  let  us 
keep  the  feast,  not  with  old  leaven,  nor  with  the  leaven  of  malice  and 
wickedness,  but  with  the  unleavened  loaves  of  sincerity  and  truth. 

The  particular  import  and  application  of  this  allegory  are  to  be 
found  in  the  context.  The  apostle  has  in  mind  the  case 
of  the  incestuous  person  who  was  tolerated  in  the  church 
at  Corinth,  and  whose  foul  example  would  be  likely  to  contaminate 
the  wdiole  Church.  He  enjoins  his  immediate  expulsion,  and  ex- 
presses amazement  that  they  showed  no  humiliation  and  grief  in 
having  such  a  stain  upon  their  character  as  a  church,  but  seemed 
rather  to  be  puffed  up  with  self-conceit  and  pride.  "Not goodly," 
not  seemly  or  beautiful  {ov  KaXov),  he  says,  "is  your  paraphrase  of 
glorying"  {Kavxriiia,  ground  of  glorying).  Sadly  out  of  ^^^  passage. 
place  your  exultation  and  boast  of  being  a  Christian  church  with 
such  a  reproach  and  abuse  in  your  midst.  Know  ye  not  the  com- 
mon proverb  of  the  working  of  leaven?  The  toleration  of  such 
impurity  and  scandal  in  the  Christian  society  will  soon  corrupt  the 
Avhole  body.  Purge  out,  then,  the  old  leaven.  Cast  off  and  put 
utterly  away  the  old  corrupt  life  and  habits  of  heathenism.  You 
know  the  customs  of  the  passover.  "You  know  how,  when  the 
lamb  is  killed,  every  particle  of  leaven  is  removed  from  every 
household;  every  morsel  of  food  eaten,  every  drop  drunk  in  that 
feast,  is  taken  in  its  natural  state.  This  is  the  true  figure  of  your 
condition.  You  are  the  chosen  people,  delivered  from  bondage; 
you  are  called  to  begin  a  new  life,  you  have  had  the  lamb  slain  fo;- 
you  in  the  person  of  Christ.  Whatever,  therefore,  in  you  corr(  - 
sponds  to  the  literal  leaven,  must  be  utterly  cast  out ;  the  perpetual 
passover  to  which  we  are  called  must  be  celebrated,  like  theirs,  un- 
contaminated  by  any  corrupting  influence." ' 

with  the  scenes  of  the  passover,  either  present  or  recent,  in  his  thoughts. — Stanley  on 
the  Epistles  to  tlie  Corinilii:ins,  in  loco. 
'  Stanley  on  Corinthians,  in  loco. 


316  PRINCIPLES   OF 

In  such  an  allegory  care  slioukl  be  taken  to  give  the  right  mean 

^  ins;  to  the  more  important  allusions.     The  old  leaven  in 

The  more  im-        ^^  ^ 

portant  aiiu-  verse  7  is  not  to  be  explained  as  referring  directly  to 
sions.  ^j^g  incestuous  person  mentioned  in  the  context.     It  has 

a  wider  import,  and  denotes,  undoubtedly,  all  corrupt  habits  and  im- 
moral practices  of  the  old  heathen  life,  of  which  this  case  of  incest 
was  but  one  notorious  specimen.  The  leaven  in  the  Corinthian 
church  was  not  so  much  the  person  of  this  particular  offender,  as 
the  corrupting  influence  of  his  example,  a  residuum  of  the  old  unre- 
generate  state.  So  "  the  leaven  of  the  Pharisees  "  was  not  the  per- 
sons, but  the  doctrine  and  example  of  the  Pharisees.  Furthermore, 
the  words  "  even  as  ye  are  unleavened  "  are  not  to  be  taken  literally 
(as  Rosenmiiller,  Wieseler,  and  Conybeare),  as  if  meaning  "even 
as  ye  are  now  celebrating  the  feast  of  unleavened  bread."  Such  a 
mixing  of  literal  and  allegorical  significations  together  is  not  to  be 
assumed  unless  necessary.  If  such  had  been  the  apostle's  design 
he  would  scarcely  have  used  the  word  unleavened  (d^vjioc)  of  per- 
sons abstaining  from  leavened  bread.  Nor  is  it  supposable  that 
the  whole  Corinthian  church,  or  any  considerable  portion  of  them, 
observed  the  Jewish  passover.  And  even  if  Paul  had  been  observ- 
ing this  feast  at  Ephesus  at  the  time  he  wrote  this  epistle  (chap, 
xvi,  8),  it  would  have  been  some  time  past  when  the  epistle  reached 
Corinth,  so  that  the  allusion  would  have  lost  all  its  pertinency  and 
effect.  But  Paul  here  uses  unleavened  figuratively  of  the  Corinth- 
ians considered  as  a  "  new  lump ; "  for  so  the  words  used  imme- 
diately before  and  after  imply. 

The  vivid  allegory  of  the  Christian  armour  and  conflict,  in  Eph. 

vi,  11-17,  furnishes  its  own  interpretation,  and  is  espe- 
Allegory  of  the      .'  ,  i      .  .      ,  ,  .  ^    ,        \-e 

chiistian    ar-  cially  notable  m  the  paiticular  explanations  of  the  dif- 

"'""'^"  ferent  parts  of  the  armour.     It  appropriates  the  figure 

used  in  Lsa.  lix,  17  (comp.  also  Rom.  xiii,  12;  1  Thess.  v,  8),  and 
elaborates  it  in  great  detail.  Its  several  parts  make  up  r7\v  rzavo- 
irXiav  rov  Qeov,  "  the  whole  armour  (panoply)  of  God,"  the  entire 
outfit  of  weapons,  offensive  and  defensive,  which  is  supplied  by 
God.  The  enumeration  of  the  several  parts  shows  that  the  apostle 
has  in  mind  the  panoply  of  a  heavy-armed  soldier,  with  which  the 
dwellers  in  all  provinces  of  the  Roman  Empire  must  have  been  suf- 
ficiently familiar.  The  conflict  {rj  ttclXt],  a  life  and  death  struggle) 
is  not  against  blood  and  flesh  (weak,  fallible  men,  comp.  Gal.  i,  IC), 
but  against  the  organized  spiritual  forces  of  the  kingdom  of  dark- 
ness, and  hence  the  necessity  of  taking  on  the  entire  armour  of 
God,  wliicli  alone  can  meet  the  exigencies  of  such  a  wrestling.  The 
six  pieces  ol'  armour  here  n^uiicd,  w  liii  li  include  girdle  and  sandals. 


ETBLTCAL   HERMENEUTICS.  317 

are .  sufficiently  explained  by  the  writer  himself,  and  ought  not,  in 
interpretation,  to  be  pressed  into  all  possible  details  of  comparison 
which  corresponding  portions  of  ancient  armour  might  be  made  to 
suggest.  Here,  as  in  Isa.  lix,  17,  righteousness  is  represented  as  a 
breastplate,  but  in  1  Thess.  v,  8,  faitJi  and  love  are  thus  depicted. 
Here  the  helmet  is  salvation — a  present  consciousness  of  salvation 
in  Christ  as  an  actual  possession — but  in  1  Thess.  v,  8  it  is  the  Jiope 
of  salvation.  Each  allusion  must  be  carefully  studied  in  the  light 
of  its  own  context,  and  not  be  too  widely  referred.  For  the  same 
figure  may  be  used  at  different  times  for  different  purposes.^ 

The  complex  allegory  of  the  door  of  the  sheep  and  of  the  good 
shepherd,  in  John  x,  1-16,  is  in  the  main  simple  and  self-  AUeo-orv  of 
interpreting.  But  as  it  involves  the  twofold  comparison  Johux,  i-io. 
of  Christ  as  the  door  and  the  good  shepherd,  and  has  other  allu- 
sions of  diverse  character,  its  interpretation  requires  particular  care, 
lest  the  main  figures  become  confused,  and  non-essential  points 
be  made  too  prominent.  The  passage  should  be  divided  into  two 
parts,  and  it  should  be  noted  that  the  first  five  verses  are  a  pure 
allegory,  containing  no  explanation  within  itself.  It  is  observed,  in 
verse  6,  that  the  allegory  (TTapoiiua)  was  not  understood  by  those  to 
whom  it  was  addressed.  Thereupon  Jesus  proceeded  (verses  7-16) 
not  only  to  explain  it,  but  also  to  expand  it  by  the  addition  of  other 
images.  He  makes  it  emphatic  that  he  himself  is  "  the  door  of  the 
sheep,"  but  adds  further  on  that  he  is  the  good  shepherd,  ready  to 
give  his  life  for  the  sheep,  and  thus  distinguished  from  the  hireling 
who  forsakes  the  flock  and  flees  in  the  hour  of  danger. 

The  allegory  stands  in  vital  relation  to  the  history  of  the  blind 
man  who  was  cast  out  of  "the  synagogue  by  the  Phari-   ^ 

J       o    o  J  ^  Occasion  and 

sees,  but  graciously  received  by  Jesus.    The  occasion  and   scope  of  the 
scope  of  the  whole  passage  cannot  be  clearly  apprehended  '^  '^^o'^y- 
without  keeping  this  connexion  constantly  in  mind.      Jesus  first 

'  Meyer  appropriately  observes :  "  The  figurative  mode  of  regarding  a  subject  can 
by  no  means,  with  a  mind  so  many-sided,  rich,  and  versatile  as  that  of  St.  Paul,  be  so 
stereotyped  that  the  very  same  thing  which  he  has  here  viewed  under  the  figure  of 
the  protecting  breastplate,  must  have  presented  itself  another  time  under  this  very 
same  figure.  Thus,  for  example,  there  appears  to  him,  as  an  offering  well  pleasing  to 
God,  at  one  time  Christ  (Eph.  v,  2),  at  another  the  gifts  of  love  received  (Phil,  iv,  18), 
at  another  time  the  bodies  of  Christians  (Rom.  xii,  1);  under  the  figure  of  the  seed- 
corn,  at  one  time  the  body  becoming  buried  (1  Cor.  xv,  36),  at  another  time  the  moral 
conduct  (Gal.  vi,  7) ;  under  the  figure  of  the  leaven,  once  moral  corruption  (1  Cor.  v,  6), 
another  time  doctrinal  corruption  (Gal.  v,  9) ;  under  the  figure  of  clothing  which  is 
put  on,  once  the  new  man  (Eph.  iv,  24),  another  time  Christ  (Gal.  iii,  27),  at  another 
time  the  body  (2  Cor.  v,  3),  and  other  similar  instances." — Critical  Commentary  on 
Ephesians,  in  loco. 


318  PRINCIPLES   OF 

contrasts  liimself,  as  the  door  of  tlie  sheep,  Avith  those  who  acted 
rather  the  part  of  thieves  and  robbers  of  the  flock.  Then,  when 
the  Pharisees  fail  to  understand  him,  he  partly  explains  his  mean- 
iiii;,  and  goes  on  to  contrast  himself,  as  the  good  shepherd,  with 
those  who  h.-id  no  genuine  care  for  the  sheep  committed  to  their 
cliarge,  but,  at  the  coming  of  the  wolf,  would  leave  them  and 
fieo.  At  verse  17  he  drops  the  figure,  and  speaks  of  his  willing- 
ness to  lay  down  his  life,  and  of  his  power  to  take  it  again.  Thus 
the  whole  passage  should  be  studied  in  the  light  of  that  pharisaical 
opposition  to  Christ  which  showed  itself  to  be  selfish  and  self-seek- 
ing, and  ready  to  do  violence  when  met  with  opposition.  These 
Pharisaical  Jews,  who  assumed  to  hold  the  doors  of  the  synagogue, 
and  had  agreed  to  thrust  out  any  that  confessed  Jesus  as  the  Christ 
(chap,  ix,  22),  were  no  better  than  thieves  and  robbers  of  God's 
flock.  Against  these  the  allegory  was  aimed. 
//  Keeping  in  view  this  occasion  and  scope  of  the  allegory,  we  next 
Import  of  par-  inquire  into  the  meaning  of  its  principal  allusions, 
ticuiar  parts.      u  ^p^g  f^jj  ^f  ^.j^g  ^^l^^^p  »  jg  t|j^.  Church  of  God's  people, 

who  are  here  represented  as  his  sheep.  Christ  himself  is  the  door, 
as  he  emphatically  affirms  (verses  7,  9),  and  every  true  shepherd, 
teacher,  and  guide  of  God's  people  should  recognize  him  as  the 
oidy  way  and  means  of  entering  into  the  fold.  Shepherd  and  sheep 
alike  should  enter  through  this  door.  "  He  that  enters  in  through 
the  door  is  a  shepherd '  of  the  sheep"  (ver.  2);  not  a  thief,  nor  a 
robber,  nor  a  stranger  (ver.  5).  He  is  well  known  to  all  who  have 
any  charge  of  the  fold,  and  his  voice  is  familiar  to  the  sheep.  A 
stranger's  voice,  on  the  contrary,  is  a  cause  of  alarm  and  flight.' 
Such,  indeed,  were  the  action  and  words  of  those  Jewish  officials 
toward  the  man  wlu>  hud  received  his  sight.  He  pei'ceived  in  their 
words  and  manner  tliat  which  was  strange  and  alien  to  the  truth  of 
God  (see  chap,  ix,  30-33). 

So  far  all  seems  clear,  but  we  should  be  less  positive  in  finding 
other  special  meanings.  The  porter,  or  doorkeeper  (dvpoipog,  ver. 
S),  has  been  explained  variously,  as  denoting  God  (Calvin,  Bengel, 
fholuck),  or  the  Holy  Spirit  (Theodoret,  Stier,  Alford,  Lange),  or 
even  Christ  (Cyril,  Augustine),  or  INIoses  (Chrysostom),  or  John 
Baptist,  (Godet).     But  it  is  better  not  to  give  the  word  any  such 

'  Not  the  shepherd,  as  tlie  English  version  renders  -oi/j.r'/i'  here.  Tliis  has  leil  to  a 
iiiixtnre  of  fignres  by  supposing  Christ  to  be  referred  to.  In  this  first  simple  allegory 
Christ  is  only  the  door  ;  further  on,  where  the  tigiire  is  explained,  and  then  enlarged, 
he  appears  .also  as  the  good  shepherd  (verses  11,  1!). 

■  For  a  desLviption  of  the  hal)its  and  customs  of  oriental  shepherds,  see  especially, 
T'.ii;::,son,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  vol.  i,  p.  3Ul.     New  York,  1«58. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  319 

remarkable  prominence  in  the  interpretation.  The  porter  is  rather 
an  inferior  servant  of  the  shepherd.  He  opens  the  door  to  him 
when  he  comes,  and  is  supj^osed  to  obey  his  orders.  We  should,, 
therefore,  treat  this  word  as  an  incidental  feature  of  the  allegory, 
legitimate  and  essential  to  the  figure,  but  not  to  be  pressed  into  anv 
special  significance.  The  distinction  made  by  some  between  "  the 
sheep  "  and  "  his  own  sheep  "  in  verse  3,  by  supposing  that  several 
flocks  were  accustomed  to  occupy  one  fold,  and  the  sheep  of  each 
particular  flock,  which  had  a  separate  shepherd,  are  to  be  under- 
stood by  "  his  own  sheep,"  may  be  allowed,  but  ought  not  to  be 
urged.  It  is  as  well  to  understand  the  calling  his  own  sheep  by 
name  as  simply  a  special  allusion  to  the  eastern  custom  of  giving 
particular  names  to  favourite  sheep.  But  we  may  with  propriety 
understand  the  leading  them  out  {e^dyei  avrd,  ver.  3),  and  putting 
forth  all  his  oicn  (rd  Mm  Tvavra  tKpakrj,  ver.  4),  as  an  intimation  of 
the  exodus  of  God's  elect  and  faithful  ones  from  the  fold  of  the  old 
Testament  theocracy.  This  view  is  maintained  by  Lange  and  Godet, 
and  is  suggested  and  warranted  by  the  words  of  Jesus  in  verses 
14-16. 

The  language  of  Jesus  in  defining  his  allegoi'y  and  expanding  its 
imagery  (verses  7-16)  is  in  some  points  enigmatical,  j,^^,,  ,^pi^„^ 
For  he  would  not  make  things  too  plain  to  those  who,  tion  somewuar 
like  the  Pharisees,  assumed  to  see  and  know  so  much  ^^^"^^ 
(comp.  chap,  ix,  39-41),  and  he  uses  the  strong  words,  which  seem 
to  be  purposely  obscure:  "All  as  many  as  came  before  me  are 
thieves  and  robbers"  (ver.  8).  He  would  prompt  special  inquiry 
and  concern  as  to  what  might  be  meant  by  coming  he/ore  him,  a 
procedure  so  wrong  that  he  likens  it  to  the  stealth  of  a  thief  and 
the  rapacity  of  a  robber.  Most  natural  is  it  to  understand  the  com- 
ing  before  me,  in  verse  8,  as  corresponding  with  the  climbing  t<p 
some  other  wag,  in  verse  1,  and  meaning  an  entrance  into  the  fold 
other  than  through  the  door.  But  it  is  manifestly  aimed  at  those 
who,  like  these  Pharisees,  by  their  action  and  attitude,  assumed  to 
be  lords  of  the  theocracy,  and  used  both  deceit  and  violence  to  ac- 
complish their  own  will.  Hence  it  would  seem  but  proper  to 
give  the  words  before  me  {npo  kfxov,  ver.  8)  a  somewhat  broad  and 
general  significance,  and  not  press  them,  as  many  do,  into  the  one 
sole  idea  of  a  2>recedence  in  time.  The  preposition  7rp6  is  often  used 
of  place,  as  before  the  doors,  before  the  gate,  before  the  city  (comp. 
Acts  V,  23;  xii,  6,  14;  xiv,  13)  and  may  here  combine  Avith  the 
temporal  reference  of  7]Xdov,  came,  the  further  idea  of  position  in 
front  of  the  door.  These  Pharisees  came  as  teachers  and  guides  of 
the  people,  and  in  such  conduct  as  that  of  casting  out  the  man  born 


320  PRINCIPLES   OF 

blind,  they  placed  tliemselves  in  front  of  the  true  door,  shutting  up 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  against  men,  and  neither  entering  them- 
selves nor  allowing  others  to  enter  through  that  door  (comp.  Matt, 
xxiii,  13).  All  this  Jesus  may  have  intended  by  the  enigmatical 
<iame  before  me.  Accordingly,  the  various  explanations,  as  "  instead 
of  me,"  "  without  regard  to  me,"  "  passing  by  me,"  and  "  pressing 
before  me,"  have  all  a  measure  of  correctness.  The  expression  is 
to  be  interpreted,  as  Lange  urges,  with  special  reference  to  the 
figure  of  the  door.  "The  meaning  is.  All  who  came  before  the  door 
{ttqo  rrjg  dvpag  ^At9ov).  With  the  idea  of  passing  by  the  door  this 
other  is  connected:  the  setting  of  themselves  up  for  the  door;  that  is, 
all  who  came  claiming  rule  over  the  conscience  as  spiritual  lords. 
The  time  of  their  cominjr  is  indicated  to  be  alreadv  past  by  the 
^jXdov,  not  however  by  the  np6,  forasmuch  as  the  positive  irpo  does 
not  coincide  with  the  temporal  one.  ...  At  the  same  time  empha- 
sis is  given  to  the  rjXdov.  They  came  as  though  the  Messiah  had 
come;  there  was  no  room  left  for  him.  It  is  not  necessary  that  Ave 
should  confine  our  thou<yht  to  those  who  were  false  Messiahs  in  the 
stricter  sense  of  the  term,  since  the  majority  of  these  did  not  ap- 
pear until  after  Christ.  Every  hierarch  prior  to  Christ  was  pseudo- 
jNIessianic  in  proportion  as  he  was  anti-Christian;  and  to  covet  rule 
over  the  conscience  of  men  is  pseudo-Christian.  Be  it  further  ob- 
served that  the  thieves  and  robbers,  who  climb  over  the  Avail,  ap- 
pear in  this  verse  Avith  the  assumption  of  a  higher  poAver.  They 
stand  no  longer  in  their  naked  selfishness,  they  lay  claim  to  posi- 
tive importance,  and  that  not  merely  as  shepherds,  but  as  the  door 
itself.  Tims  the  hiorarclis  had  just  been  attempting  to  exercise 
rule  over  the  man  who  Avas  born  blind." ' 

The  import  of  the  other  allusions  and  statements  of  this  passage 
is  sufficiently  clear,  but  in  a  thorough  and  elaborate  treatment  of 
the  whole  subject  the  student  should  compare  the  similar  allegories 
Avhich  are  found  in  Jer.  xxiii,  1-4;  Exek.  xxxiv;  Zech.  xi,  4-17; 
and  also  the  twenty-third  Psalm.  So  also  the  allegory  of  the  vine 
and  its  branches,  John  xv,  I-IO'* — an  allegory  like  that  of  the  door 
and  the  shepherd  peculiar  to  John — may  be  profitably  compared 

'  Lange's  Commentary  on  John,  in  loco. 

*  According  to  Lange  (on  .John  xv,  1)  "  .Tpsus' discourse  concerning  the  vine  is 
neither  an  allegory  nor  a  parable,  but  a  parabolic  discourse,  and  that  a  symbolical 
one."  But  this  is  an  over-refinement,  and  withal,  misleading.  The  figures  of  some 
allegories  may  be  construed  as  symbols,  and  allegory  and  parable  may  have  much  in 
common.  Hut  this  figure  of  the  vine,  illustrnting  the  vital  and  oigauic  iniion  between 
€hrist  and  believers,  has  every  essential  (|uality  of  the  allegory,  and  contains  its  own 
interpretation  within  itself. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  321 

and  contrasted  with  the  psahnist's  allegory  of  the  vine  (Psa.  Ixxx, 
8-15)  which  we  have  already  noticed. 

The  allegorizing  process  by  which  Paul,  in  Gal.  iv,  21-31,  makes 
Hagar  and  Sarah  illustrate  two  covenants,  is  an  excep-  Paul's  allegory 
tional  New  Testament  instance  of  developing  a  mysti-  g'J  p^'j,i|arand 
cal  meaning  from  facts  of  Old  Testament  history,  Paul  exceptional, 
elsewhere  (Rom.  vii,  1-6)  illustrates  the  believer's  release  from  the 
law,  and  union  with  Christ,  by  means  of  the  law  of  marriage,  ac- 
cording to  which  a  woman,  upon  the  death  of  her  husband,  is  dis- 
charged from  [Karqpyrjrat)  the  law  which  bound  her  to  him  alone, 
and  is  at  liberty  to  become  united  to  another  man.  In  2  Cor.  iii, 
13-16,  he  contrasts  the  open  boldness  (napprjaia)  of  the  Gospel 
preaching  with  the  veil  which  Moses  put  on  his  face  purposely  to 
conceal  for  the  time  the  transitory  character  of  the  Old  Testament 
ministration  which  then  apjDcared  so  glorious,  but  was,  nevei-theless, 
destined  to  pass  away  like  the  glory  of  his  own  God-lit  face.  He 
also,  in  the  same  j^assage,  makes  the  veil  a  symbol  of  the  incapacity 
of  Israel's  heart  to  apprehend  the  Lord  Christ.  The  passage  of  the 
Red  Sea,  and  the  rock  in  the  desert  from  which  the  water  flowed, 
are  recognized  as  types  of  spiritual  things  (1  Cor.x,  1-4;  comp. 
1  Peter  iii,  21).  But  all  these  illustrations  from  the  Old  Testament 
differ  essentially  from  the  allegory  of  the  two  oo\enants.  Paul 
himself,  by  the  manner  and  style  in  which  he  iiitroduces  it,  evi- 
dently feels  that  his  argument  is  exceptional  and  jDeculiar,  and  being 
addressed  especially  to  those  who  boasted  of  their  attachment  tc» 
the  law,  it  has  the  nature  of  an  argmnentum  ad  horninem,  "At  the 
conclusion  of  the  theoretical  portion  of  his  epistle,'^  says  jMeyer„ 
"  Paul  adds  a  quite  peculiar  antinomistic  disquisitiou; — a  learned: 
rabbinico-alleaorical  arirument  derived  from  the  law  itself — ealcu- 
lated  to  annihilate  the  influence  oi  the  pseudo-apostles  with  their 
own  weapons,  and  to  root  them  out  of  their  own  ground." ' 

We  observe  that  the  apostle,  first  of  all,  states  the  historical  facts, 
as  written  in  the  Book  of  Genesis,  namely,  that  Abra-   „.  ,    .    ... 

'  •' '  Historical  facts 

ham  was  the  father  of  two  sons,  one  by  the  bond  wom-   accepted  as  ut- 

an,  the  other  by  the  free  woman;  the  son  of  the  bond-   '^^^  ^ 

maid  was  born  Kara  odpKa,  according  to  flesh,  i.  e.,  according  to  the 

ordinary  course  of  nature,  but  the  son  of  the  free  woman  was  born 

through  promise,  and,  as  the  Scripture  shows  (Gen.  xvii,  19;  xviii, 

10-14),  by  miraculous  interposition.     He  further  on  brings  in  the 

rabbinical  tradition  founded  on  Gen.  xxi,  9,  that  Ishmael  persecuted 

{edccoKE,  ver.  29)  Isaac,  perhaps  having  in  mind  also  some  subsequent 

aggressions  of  the  Ishmaelites  upon  Israel,  and  then  adds  the  words 

'  Critical. Gonimer.tarv  on  Galatians,  in  loco. 
21 


322  PRINCIPLES   OF 

of  Sarah,  as  written  in  Gen.  xxi,  10,  adaj^ting  them  somewhat  freely 
to  his  i^urpose.  It  is  evident  from  all  this  that  Paul  recognizes  the 
.  grammatico-historical  truthfulness  of  the  Old  Testament  narrative. 
But,  he  says,  all  these  historical  facts  are  capable  of  being  allegor- 
ized: aTivd  ecTLV  dXXrjyopovfieva,  tchich  things  are  allegorical ;  or  as 
Ellicott  well  expresses  it:  "All  which  things,  viewed  in  their  most 
general  light,  are  allegorical."  '  He  proceeds  to  allegorize  the  facts 
referred  to,  making  the  two  Avomen  represent  the  two  covenants, 
the  Sinaitic  (Jewish)  and  the  Christian,  and  showing  in  detail  how 
one  tiling  answers  to,  or  ranks  icith  {avaroixd)  another,  and  also 
wherein  the  two  covenants  stand  opposed.  We  may  represent  the 
correspondences  of  his  allegory  as  follows: 

'  Ilagar,  bondmaid,    =01d    Covenant,  avannxd,   The  present  Jerusalem. 

-  Sarali,  free  woman, =New  Covenant,  "  Jeruisalem  above,  our  mother. 

,  j  3  Ishmacl,  c  liil J  of  flesh,  "  Those  in  bondage  to  the  law. 

(  ••  Isaac,  child  of  promise,  "  We,  Christian  brethren  (ver.  28). 

i^Ishmael  persecuted  Isaac,  "  So  now  legalists  pers.  Christians. 

.^    .                    ^             ,       ,      .,      ,  „  (  I  sav,  (ver.  31;  V,  1):  Be  not  en- 

8  Scripture  says :  Cast  out  bondmaid  and  son,  "  -^     ,  '    i    i  •        i       r,       , 

'^            ■  '  (      tangled  m  yoke  of  bondage. 

The  above  tabulation  exhibits  at  a  glance  six  jjoints  of  similitude 
(on  a  line  with  the  figures  1,  2,  3,  etc.),  and  three  sets  of  things  con- 
trasted (as  linked  by  the  braces  a,  b,  c).  The  general  import  of  the 
apostle's  language  is  clear  and  simple,  and  this  allegorizing  process 
served  most  aptly  both  to  illustrate  the  relations  and  contrasts  of 
the  Law  and  the  Gospel,  and  also  to  confound  and  silence  the  Juda- 
izing  legalists,  against  whom  Paul  Avas  writing. 

Here  arises  the  important  hermeneutical  question,  What  inference 
What  authori-  ^^'^  ^^'^  ^^  draw  from  this  example  of  an  inspired  apostle 
ty  attaciics  to  allegorizing  the  facts  of  sacred  history?  Was  it  a  fruit 
pie  of  aik'Kor-  of  ^lis  rabbinical  education,  and  a  sanction  of  that  alle- 
izing?  gorical  method  of  interpretation  which  was  prevalent, 

especially  among  Jewish-Alexandrian  writers,  at  that  time? 

That  Paul  in  this  jiassage  treats  historical  facts  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment as  capable  of  being  used  allegorically  is  a  simple  matter  of 
fact.  That  he  was  familiar  with  the  allegorical  methods  of  ex- 
pounding the  Scriptures  current  in  his  day  is  scarcely  to  be  doubted. 
That  his  own  rabbinical  training  had  some  influence  on  him,  and 
coloured  his  methods  of  arcjument  and  illustration,  there  seems  no 
valid  reason  to  deny.  It  is  further  evident  that  in  his  allegorical 
use  of  Hagar  and  Sarah  he  employs  an  exceptional  and  peculiar 
method  of  dealing  with  his  Judaizing  opponents,  and,  so  far  as  the 
passage  is  an  argument,  it  is  essentially  an  arguinentum  ad honiinem. 

'  Commentarv  on  Galatians,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  323 

But  it  is  not  merely  an  argument  of  that  kind,  as  if  it  could  have 
no  worth  or  force  with  any  other  parties.  It  is  assumed  to  have  an 
interest  and  value  as  illustrating  certain  relations  of  the  Law  and 
the  Gospel.'  But  its  position,  connexion,  and  use  in  this  epistle  to 
the  Galatians  gives  no  sufficient  warrant  for  such  allegorical  methods 
in  general.  Schmoller  remarks  :  "  Paul  to  be  sure  allegorizes  here, 
for  he  says  so  himself.  But  with  the  very  fact  of  his  saying  tliis 
himself,  the  gravity  of  the  hermeneutical  difficulty  disappears.  lie 
means  therefore  to  give  an  allegory,  not  an  exposition;  he  does  not 
proceed  as  an  exegete,  and  does  not  mean  to  say  (after  the  manner 
of  the  allegorizing  exegetes)  that  only  what  he  now  says  is  the  true 
sense  of  the  narrative.'"^  Herein  especially  consists  the  great  dif- 
ference between  Paul's  example  and  that  of  nearly  all  the  alle- 
gorists.  He  concedes  and  assumes  the  historical  truthfulness  of 
the  Old  Testament  narrative,  but  makes  an  allegorical  use  of  it  for 
a  special  and  exceptional  purpose.^ 

'  According  to  Jowett,  "  it  is  neither  an  argument  nor  an  illustration,  but  an  inter- 
pretation of  the  Old  Testament  Scripture  after  the  manner'  of  the  age  in  which  he 
lived ;  that  is,  after  the  manner  of  the  Jewish  and  (Christian  Alexandrian  writers. 
Whatever  difference  there  is  between  him  and  them,  or  between  Philo  and  the  Chris- 
tian fathers,  as  interpreters  of  Scripture,  is  not  one  of  kind,  but  of  degree.  The 
Christian  writers  lay  aside  many  of  the  extravagances  of  Philo;  St.  Paul  is  free  also 
from  their  extravagances,  employing  only  casually,  and  exceptionally,  and  when  rea- 
soning with  those  '  who  desire  to  be  under  the  law,'  what  they  use  haliitually  and  un- 
sparingly, so  as  to  overlay,  and  in  some  cases  to  destroy  the  original  sense.  Instead 
of  seeking  to  draw  subtle  distinctions  between  the  method  of  St.  Paul  and  that  of  his 
age,  probably  of  the  school  in  which  he  was  brought  up,  it  is  better  to  observe  that 
the  noble  spirit  of  the  apostle  shines  through  the  '  elements  of  the  law '  in  which  ho 
clothes  his  meaning." — The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Thessalonians,  Galatians,  etc., 
with  Critical  Notes  and  Dissertations,  vol.  i,  p.  285.     London,  1855. 

^  Commentary  on  Galatians  (Lange's  Biblework),  in  loco. 

"  J.  B.  Liijhtfoot  compares  and  contrasts  Philo's  allegory  of  Hagar  and  Sarah,  and 
shows  how  the  two  move  in  different  realms  of  thought,  and  yet  have  points  of  re- 
semblance as  well  as  points  of  difference.  He  shows  how,  "  with  Philo,  the  allegory 
is  the  whole  substance  of  his  teaching ;  with  St.  Paul  it  is  but  an  accessory."  He  fur- 
nishes also,  on  the  general  subject,  the  following  judicious  and  sensible  remarks : 
"We  need  not  fear  to  allow  that  St.  Paul's  mode  of  teaching  here  is  coloured  by  his 
early  education  in  the  rabbinical  schools.  It  were  as  unreasonable  to  stake  the  apos- 
tle's inspiration  on  the  turn  of  a  metaphor  or  the  character  of  an  illustration  or  tlio 
form  of  an  argument,  as  on  purity  of  diction.  No  one  now  thinks  of  maintaining  t'.mt 
the  language  of  the  inspired  writers  reaches  the  classical  standard  of  correctness  and 
elegance,  though  at  one  time  it  was  held  almost  a  heresy  to  deny  this.  'A  treasure  con- 
tained in  earthen  vessels,'  '  strength  made  perfect  in  weakness,'  '  rudeness  in  speech, 
yet  not  in  knowledge,' — such  is  the  far  noisier  conception  of  inspired  teaching  which 
we  may  gather  from  the  apostle's  own  language.  And  this  language  we  should  do 
well  to  bear  in  mind." — St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  Greek  Text,  Notes,  etc., 
p.  370.     Andover,  ISSL 


y 


324  PRINCIPLES   OF 

Hence  we  may  say,  in  general,  that  as  certain  other  Old  Testament 

characters  and  events  are  acknowledged  by  Paul  to  have  a  typical 

siarnificance  (see  Rom.  ix,  14;  1  Cor.  x,  5),  so  he  allows 

Paul's  method       '^  ^  .  . 

of  allegorizing  a  like  significance  to  the  points  specified  in  the  history 
allowable.  ^£  Hairar  and  Sarah.  But  he  never  for  a  moment  loses 
sight  of  the  historical  basis,  or  permits  his  allegorizing  to  displace  it. 
And  in  the  same  general  way  it  may  be  allowable  for  us  to  alle- 
gorize portions  of  the  Scripture,  providing  the  facts  are  capable  of 
typical  significance,  and  are  never  ignored  and  displaced  by  the 
allegorizing  process.  Biblical  characters  and  events  may  thus  be 
used  for  homiletical  purposes,  and  serve  for  "  instruction  in  right- 
eousness;" but  the  special  and  exceptional  character  of  such  hand- 
ling of  Scripture  must,  as  in  Paul's  example,  be  explicitly  acknowl- 
edged. The  apostle's  solitary  instance  is  a  sufficient  admonition 
that  such  expositions  are  to  be  indulged  in  most  sparingly. 

The  allegorical  interpretation  of  the  Book  of  Canticles,  adopted 
Interpretation  ^^y  all  the  older  Jewish  expositors  and  the  great  major- 
of  Canticles.  i^y  of  Christian  divines,  is  not  to  be  lightly  cast  aside. 
Where  such  a  unanimity  has  so  long  prevailed,  there  is  at  least 
the  presumption  that  it  is  rooted  in  some  element  of  truth.  Tlie 
methods  of  procedure  adopted  by  individual  exegetes  may  all  be 
open  to  objection,  while,  at  the  same  time,  they  may  embody  prin- 
ciples in  themselves  essentially  correct. 

The  allegorists  agree  in  making  the  pure  love  and  tender  rela- 
Aiiegoricai  tions  of  Solomou  and  Shulamith  represent  the  relations 
methods.  of  God  and  his  people.     But  when  they  come  to  details 

they  differ  most  widely,  each  writer  finding  in  particular  passages 
mystic  or  historical  allusions,  which,  in  turn,  are  disregarded  or  denied 
by  others.  In  fact,  it  can  scarcely  be  said  that  any  two  allegorizing 
minds  have  ever  agreed  throughout  in  the  details  of  their  exposi- 
tion. The  Jewish  Targura,  which  takes  the  bridegroom  to  be  the 
Lord  of  the  world,  and  the  bride  the  congregation  of  Israel,  explains 
the  whole  song  as  a  picture  of  Israel's  history,  from  the  exodus  un- 
til the  final  redemption  and  restoration  of  the  nation  to  the  mountain 
of  Jerusalem.'  Aben-Ezra  makes  the  song  an  allegorico-prophetic 
history  of  Israel  from  Abraham  onward.  Origen  and  the  Christian 
iillegorists  generally  make  Christ  the  bridegroom  and  his  Chui-ch 
the  bride.  Some,  however,  explain  all  the  allusions  of  the  loving 
intercourse  between  Christ  and  the  individual  believer,  while  others 
treat  the  whole  song  as  a  sort  of  apocalypse,  or  prophetic  picture  of 
the  history  of  the  Church  in  all  ages.     Ambrose,  in  a  sermon  on  the 

'  An  English  tianslation  of  the  Tarj^im  of  Canticles  is  given  in  Adam  Clarke's 
Comment:) rv,  nt  tlic  end  of  his  note?  on  Solomon's  Song. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  325 

perpetual  virginity  of  the  virgin  Mary,  represents  Sh^^lanlith  as 
identical  with  Mary,  the  mother  of  God.  But  these  are  only  some 
of  the  more  general  types  or  outlines  of  exposition  pursued  by 
the  allegorists.  Besides  such  leading  differences  there  is  an  end- 
less and  most  confusing  mass  of  special  expositions.  It  is  assumed 
that  every  word  must  be  explained  in  a  mystic  sense.  The  Targum, 
for  example,  in  chap,  ii,  4,  understands  the  bringing  into  the  house 
of  wine  as  the  Lord  bringing  Israel  to  the  school  of  Mount  Sinai 
to  learn  the  law  from  Moses.  Aben-Ezra  explains  the  coming  of 
the  beloved,  leaping  over  the  mountains  (chap,  ii,  8),  as  Jehovah 
descending  upon  Sinai  and  shaking  the  whole  mountain  by  his 
thunder.  The  Christian  allegorists  also  find  in  every  word  and 
allusion  of  the  song  some  illustration  of  the  "great  mystery"  of 
which  Paul  speaks  in  Eph.  v,  31-33,  and  some  have  carried  the 
matter  into  wild  extravagance.  Thus  Epiphanius  makes  the  eighty 
concubines  (vi,  8)  prefigure  eighty  heresies  of  Christendom ;  the 
winter  (ii,  11)  denotes  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  and  the  voice  of  the 
turtle-dove  (ii,  12)  is  the  preaching  of  Paul.  Ilengstenberg  makes 
the  hair  of  the  bride,  which  is  compared  to  a  flock  of  goats  that 
leap  playfully  from  Mount  Gilead  (iv,  1),  signify  the  mass  of  the 
nations  converted  to  the  Church,  and  Cocceius  discovered  in  other 
allusions  the  strifes  of  Guelphs  and  Ghibellines,  the  struggles  of 
the  Reformation,  and  even  particular  events  like  the  capture  of 
the  elector  of  Saxony  at  Miihlberg !  And  so  the  interpretation  of 
this  book  has  been  carried  to  the  same  extreme  as  that  of  John's 
Apocalypse. 

Against  the  allegorical  interpretation  of  Canticles  we  may  urge     ^ 
three  considerations.     First,  the  notable  disagreement   „ .   ^. 

'  o  Objections     to 

of  its  advocates,  as  indicated  above,  and  the  constant  the  allegorical 
tendency  of  their  expositions  to  run  into  irrational 
extremes.  These  facts  warrant  the  inference  that  some  fatal  er- 
ror lies  in  that  method  of  procedure.  Secondly,  the  allegorists, 
as  a  rule,  deny  that  the  song  has  any  literal  basis.  The  persons 
and  objects  described  are  mere  figures  of  the  Lord  and  his  people, 
and  of  the  manifold  relations  between  them.  This  position  throws 
the  whole  exposition  into  the  realm  of  fancy,  and  explains  how,  as 
a  matter  of  fact,  each  interpreter  becomes  a  law  unto  himself. 
Having  no  basis  in  reality,  thepurely_  allegorical  inten^retation 
has_niiibeen_.ab4e  to  fix  upon  any  historical  stancIpoinjt7  or  adojjt 
any  common  principles:  Thirdly,  the  song  contains  no  intimation 
that  it  is  an  allegory.  It  certainly  does  not,  like  the  other  alle- 
gories of  Scripture,  contain  its  exposition  within  itself.  Hereinj_as 
w^jKvye  shown  above,  ihe  allegory  differs  from  the  parable,  and  to 


V^ 


326  PRINCIPLES   OF 

be  self-consistent  in  allegorizing  the  song  of  songs  we  should  either 
adopt  Paul's  method  with  the  history  of  Sarah  and  Ilagar,  and,  al- 
lowing a  literal  historical  basis,  say :  All  these  things  may  be  alle- 
gorized; or  else  we  should  call  the  song  a  parable,  and,  as  in  the 
parable  of  the  prodigal  son,  affirm  that  its  imagery  is  true  to  fact 
and  nature  and  capable  of  literal  explanation,  but  that  it  serves 
more  especially  to  set  forth  the  mystic  relation  that  exists  between 
God  and  his  people. 

Following,  therefore,  the  analogy  of  Scripture  we  may  more  ap- 
propriately designate  the  Canticles  as  a  dramatic  par- 
dramatic  Par-  able.     It  may  or  may  not  have  had  a  literal  historical 
^  ^'  occasion,  as  the  marriage  of   Solomon  with  Pharaoh's 

daughter  (1  Kings  iii,  l),  or,  as  many  think,  with  some  beautiful 
shepherd-maiden  of  Northern  Palestine  (comp.  chap,  iv,  8).  In 
either  case  the  imagery  and  form  of  the  composition  are  poetic  and 
dramatic,  and,  as  in  the  book  of  Job,  we  are  not  to  suppose  a  literal 
narrative  of  persons  actually  addressing  one  another  in  such  perfect 
and  ornamental  style.  Solomon  is  a  well-knoAvn  historical  person, 
and  also,  in  Scripture,  a  typical  character.  Shulamith  may  have  been 
one  of  his  wives.  But  the  song  of  songs  is  a  j^arable,  and  its  leading 
actors  arc,  as  in  all  parables,  typical  of  others  besides  themselves. 
The  parable  depicts  in  a  most  charming  style  the  highest  ideal  of 
pure  connubial  love,  and  "we  cannot  but  believe  that  the  writer 
of  this  divine  song  recognized  the  symbolical  character  of  that  love, 
which  he  has  here  embellished.  .  ,  .  The  typical  character  of  Solo- 
mon's own  reign  was  well  understood  by  himself,  as  appears  from 
Psalm  Ixxii.  That  the  Lord's  relation  to  his  people  was  conceived 
of  as  a  marriage  from  the  tinie  of  the  covenant  at  Sinai,  is  shown  by 
repeated  expressions  which  imply  it  in  the  law  of  Moses.  That,  under 
these  circumstances,  the  marriage  of  the  king  of  Israel  should  carry 
the  thought  up  by  a  ready  and  spontaneous  association  to  the  cov- 
enant-relation of  the  Km g  par  excellence  to  the  people  whom  he  had 
espoused  to  himself,  is  surely  no  extravagant  supposition,  even  if  the 
analogous  instance  of  Psalm  xlv  did  not  remove  it  from  the  rejrion 
of  conjecture  to  that  of  established  fact.  The  mystical  use  made  of 
marriage  so  frequently  in  the  subsequent  scriptures,  with  evident 
and  even  verbal  allusion  to  this  song,  and  the  constant  interpreta- 
tion of  both  the  Synagogue  and  the  Church,  show  the  naturalness  of 
the  symbol,  and  enhance  the  probability  that  the  writer  himself  saAV 
what  the  great  body  of  his  readers  have  found  in  his  production.'" 

'  Prof.  W.  H.  Green,  in  American  edition  of  Lange's  0.  T.  Commentary,  Introduc- 
tion pp.  24,  25.  This  learned  exogcte  adopts,  along  with  Zoeldor,  Dclitzscli,  and 
some  others,  what  he  calls  the  typical  method  of  interpreting  the  Canticles.     "  I  am 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  327 

Accepting,  then,  the  view  that  the  song  is  of  parabolic  import, 
we  should  avoid  the  extravagances  of  those  allegorists  who  find  a 
spiritual  significance  in  every  word  and  metaphor.  We  should,  i/ 
first  of  all,  study  to  ascertain  the  literal  sense  of  every  passage,  ^y 
First  the  natural,  afterward  that  which  is  spiritual.  The  assump- 
tion  of  many  that  the  literal  sense  involves  absurdities  and  revolt- 
ing images  is  a  grave  error.  Such  writers  seem  to  forget  that  "  the 
work  is  an  oriental  j)oem,  and  the  diction  should  therefore  not  be 
taken  as  prose.  It  is  the  offspring  of  a  luxuriant  imagination 
tinged  with  the  voluptuousness  characteristic  of  the  eastern  mind. 
There  love  is  w^arm  and  passionate  even  while  pure.  It  deals  in 
colours  and  images  which  seem  extravagant  to  the  colder  ideas  of 
the  West." '  ,  • 

Having  apprehended  the  literal  sense,  we  should  proceed,  as  in  a 
parable,  to  define  the  general  scojdc  and  plan  of  the  entire  song.  \^ 
But  remembering  that  the  whole  is  poetry  of  the  most  highly  oi'na- 
mented  character,  the  particular  descriptions  of  persons,  scenes,  and 
events  must  not  be  supposed  to  have  in  every  detail  a  spiritual  or 
mystic  significance.  The  mention  of  spikenard,  myrrh,  and  cypress 
flowers  (cliap.  i,  12-14),  yields  an  intensified  thought  of  fragrance, 
and  indicates  the  mutual  attractiveness  of  the  lovers,  and  their  de- 
sire and  care  to  please  one  another;  and  from  this  general  idea  it  is 
not  difficult  to  infer  similar  relations  between  the  Lord  and  his 
chosen  ones.  But  an  attempt  to  find  special  meanings  in  the  spike,  ^ 
nard,  and  myrrh,  and  cypress  flower,  as  if  each  allusion  pointed  to 
some  distinct  feature  of  the  economy  of  grace,  would  lead  to  certain 
failure  in  the  exegesis.  The  carping  critics  who  have  found  fault 
with  the  descriptions  of  the  bodies  of  Solomon  and  Shulamith,  and 
condemned  them  as  revolting  to  a  chaste  imagination,  too  readily 
ignore  the  fact  that  from  the  historical  standpoint  of  the  ancient 
writer  these  were  the  noblest  ideals  of  the  perfect  human  form,  which, 
according  to  the  psalmist  (Psa.  cxxxix,  14),  is  "  fearfully  and  wonder- 
fully made."  The  highly  wrought  eulogy  of  the  person  of  the  be- 
loved (chap.  V,  10-16)  gives  a  vivid  idea  of  his  surpassing  beauty 
and  perfection,  and,  like  John's  glowing  vision  of  the  Son  of  man 
in  the  midst  of  the  seven  golden  candlesticks  (Rev.  i,  13-16),  may 
well  depict  the  glorious  person  of  the  Lord.  But  the  description 
must  be  taken  as  a  whole,  and  not  torn  into  pieces  by  an  effort  to 

not  sure,"  he  says,  "  but  the  absence  of  the  name  of  God,  and  of  any  distinctive  relig- 
ious expressions  throughout  the  song,  is  thus  to  be  accounted  for — that  the  writer, 
conscious  of  the  parabolic  character  of  what  he  is  describing,  felt  that  there  would  be 
an  incongruity  in  mingling  the  symbol  with  the  thing  sj-mbolized." 
^  Davidson,  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  vol.  ii,  p.  404. 


V 


038  PRINCIPLES   OF 

find  some  separate  attribute  or  doctrine  of  the  Divine  Person  in 
head,  hair,  eyes,  etc.  The  same  principle  must  be  maintained  in 
explaining  the  description  of  the  charmingly  beautiful  and  perfect 
form  of  Shulamith  in  chap,  vii,  2-6.  The  allegorical  interpreters 
have  been  guilty  of  the  most  extravagant  folly  in  spiritualizing 
every  part  of  that  portraiture  of  womanly  beauty.  But,  taken  as  a 
whole,  it  may  appropriately  set  forth,  in  type,  the  perfection  and 
beauty  of  "  a  glorious  Church,  not  having  spot,  or  wrinkle,  or  any 
such  thing"  (Eph.  v,  27). 


•  ♦•» 


CHAPTER  XV. 

PROVERBS    AND    GNOMIC    POETRY. 

The  Old  Testament  Book  of  Proverbs  has  been  appropriately  called 

an  Antholoscv  of  Hebrew  gnomes.^     Its  general  form  is 
Proverbs     de-  ,  °''  ^  •  tt  i 

nned  and  de-  poctic,  and  follows  the  usual  methods  of  Hebrew  paral- 

scnbed.  lelism.     The  simpler  proverbs  are  in  the  form  of  dis- 

tichs,and  consist  of  synonymous,  antithetic  and  synthetic  parallelisms, 
as  has  been  explained  in  a  previous  part  of  this  work.*  But  there 
are  many  involved  passages  and  obscure  allusions,  and  the  book 
contains  riddles,  enigmas,  or  dark  sayings  (HTn,  nV'pp),  as  well  as 
provei'bs  (^t?'0).  Many  a  proverb  is  also  a  condensed  parable;  some 
consist  of  metaphors,  some  of  similes,  and  some  are  extended  into 
allegories.  In  the  interpretation  of  all  scriptural  proverbs  it  is  im- 
portant, therefore,  to  distinguish  betAveen  their  substance  and  their 
form. 

The  Hebrew  word  for  2)roverh  (X*'0)  is  derived  from  the  verb 
7B'0,  which  signifies  to  liken  or  comixirc.  The  same  verb  means  also 
to  rule,  or  have  dominion,  and  some  have  sought  to  trace  a  logical 
connexion  between  the  two  significations;  but,  more  probably,  as 
Gesenius  suggests,  two  distinct  and  independent  radicals  have  coa- 
lesced under  this  one  form.  The  proverb  proper  will  generally  be 
found,  in  its  ultimate  analysis,  to  be  a  comparison  or  similitude. 
Thus,  the  saying,  which  became  a  proverb  (^5<'9)  in  Israel,  "  Is  Saul 
also  among  the  prophets'?"  arose  from  his  prophesying  after  the 
manner  of  tlie  prophets  with  w^hom  he  came  in  contact  (1  Sam.  x, 
10-12).     The  proverb  used  by  Jesus  in  the  synagogue  of  Nazareth, 

'  IJnifir.s  Weisheitslehre  der  Hcbracr,  p.  104.     Strasburg,  1851. 

^  See  above,  pp.  95-99. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  329 

"  Physician,  heal  thyself,"  is  a  condensed  parable,  as,  indeed,  it  is 
there  called  (Luke  iv,  23),  and  it  would  be  no  difficult  task  to  en- 
large it  into  a  parabolic  narrative.  Plerein  also  we  may  see  how 
jDroverbs  and  parables  came  to  be  designated  by  the  same  word. 
The  word  nagoLfita,  adage,  hyioorcl,  expresses  more  nearly  the  later 
idea  commonly  associated  with  the  Hebrew  ?^,  and  stands  as  its 
representative  in  the  Septuagint.  In  the  New  Testament  it  is  used 
in  the  sense  of  adage,  or  common  byword,  in  2  Peter  ii,  22,  but  in 
John's  Gospel  it  denotes  more  especially  an  enigmatical  discourse 
(John  X,  6;  xvi,  15,  29).^ 

Proverbs  proper  are  therefore  to  be  understood  as  short,  pithy 
sayings,  in  which  a  wise  counsel,  a  moral  lesson,  or  a  called  Gnomic 
suggestive  experience,  is  expressed  in  memorable  form,  poiuted^senti- 
Such  sayings  are  often  called  gnomic  because  of  their  ment. 
pointed  and  sententious  form  and  force.  "  The  earliest  ethical  and 
practical  wisdom  of  most  ancient  nations,"  observes  Conant,  "  found 
expression  in  short,  pithy,  and  pointed  sayings.  These  embodied, 
in  few  words,  the  suggestions  of  common  experience,  or  of  individ- 
ual reflection  and  observation.  Acute  obsei'vers  and  thinkers,  ac- 
customed to  generalize  the  facts  of  experience,  and  to  reason  from 
first  principles,  were  fond  of  clothing  their  results  in  striking  apoph- 
thegms, conveying  some  instruction  or  witty  reflection,  some  moral  or 
religious  truth,  a  maxim  of  worldly  prudence  or  policy,  or  a  practi- 
cal rule  of  life.  These  were  expressed  in  terms  aptly  chosen  to 
awaken  attention,  or  inquiry,  and  reflection,  and  in  a  form  that 
fixed  them  indelibly  in  the  memory.  They  thus  became  elements 
of  the  national  and  popular  thought,  as  inseparable  from  the  men- 
tal habits  of  the  people  as  the  power  of  perception  itself."  '  "  Prov- 
erbs," says  another,  "arc  characteristic  of  a  comparatively  early 
stage  in  the  mental  growth  of  most  nations.  Men  find  in  the  outer 
world  analogies  to  their  own  experience,  and  are  helped  by  them  to 
generalize  and  formulate  what  they  have  observed.  A  single  start- 
ling or  humorous  fact  fixes  itself  in  their  minds  as  the  type  to 
wliicli  all  like  facts  may  be  referred,  as  when  men  used  the  proverb, 
'Is  Saul  also  among  the  prophets?'  The  mere  result  of  an  induc- 
tion to  which  other  instances  may  be  referred  fixes  itself  in  their 
minds  with  the  charm  of  a  discovery,  as  in  '  the  proverb  of  the  an- 
cients. Wickedness  proceedeth  from  the  wicked'  (1  Sam.  xxiv,  13). 
.  .  .  Such  proverbs  are  found  in  the  history  of  all  nations,  gener- 
ally in  their  earlier  stages.     For  the  most  part  there  is  no  record  of 

'Comp.  above,  p.  265. 

'  The  Book  of  Proverbs,  with  Hebrew  text.  King  James'  Version,  and  Revised  Ver- 
siin.  etc.     For  the  American  Bible  Union.     Introduction,  p.  3.     New  Yori<,  1872. 


330  PRINCIPLES    OP 

tlic'ir  birth.     No  one  knows  their  author.     They  find  acceptance 

among  men,  not  as  resting  upon  the  authority  of  a  reverend  name, 

but  from  their  inherent  truth,  or  semblance  of  trutli."  ' 

The  biblical  proverbs  are  not  confined  to  the  book  which  bears 

that  title.     The  Book  of  Ecclesiastes  contains  many  a 
Rules  for   the  t-»  i  i       •       i 

interpretation     gnomic  sentence.     Proverbs  appear  also  m  almost  every 

of  proverbs.  ^^^^.^  ^^  ^^le  Scriptures,  and,  from  the  definition  and  ori- 
gin of  proverbs,  as  given  above,  it  will  be  readily  seen  tluit  much 
care  and  discrimination  may  be  often  required  for  their  proper  ex- 
position. In  such  exposition  the  following  observations  will  be 
found  of  practical  value  and  importance. 
Cl.  As  proverbs  may  consist  of  simile,  metaphor,  parable,  or  alle- 
eory,  the  interpreter  should,  first  of  all,  determine  to 

Discrimination    »      •"  ^ 

of    form   and   which  of  these  classes  of  figures,  it  to  any,  the  proverb 
figure.  properly  belongs.     We  have  seen  above  that  Prov.  v, 

15-18,  is  an  allegory.  In  Prov.  i,  20;  viii,  1;  ix,  1,  wisdom  is  per- 
sonified. Eccles.  ix,  13-18,  is  a  combination  of  parable  and  prov- 
erb, the  parable  serving  to  illustrate  the  proverb.  Some  proverbial 
similes  are  of  the  nature  of  a  commdrum,  requiring  us  to  pause  and 
study  awhile  before  we  catch  the  point  of  comparison.  The  same 
is  true  of  some  proverbial  expressions  in  which  the  comparison  is 
not  formally  stated,  but  implied.  Thus,  in  Prov.  xxvi,  8,  "  As  bind- 
ing a  stone  in  a  sling,  so  is  he  that  gives  honour  to  a  fool."  Here 
is  a  formal  comparison,  the  point  of  which  is  not  at  first  apparent, 
but  it  soon  dawns  on  the  mind  as  we  reflect  that  the  binding  fast  of 
a  stone  in  a  sling  would  of  itself  be  a  piece  of  folly.  The  next 
verse  is  enigmatical:  "A  thornbush  (nin)  goes  up  in  a  drunkard's 
hand,  and  a  pi-overb  in  the  mouth  of  fools."  The  distich  implies  a 
comparison  between  the  thornbush  in  the  drunkard's  hand  and  a 
proverb  in  thtj  mouth  of  fools.  But  what  is  the  point  of  compari- 
son ?  The  passage  is  obscure  by  reason  of  the  uncertainty  attach- 
ing to  the  word  nin,  which  may  mean  thorn,  thornbush,  or  thistle. 
The  authorized  English  version  reads:  "As  a  thorn  goeth  up  into 
the  hand  of  a  drunkard,  so  is  a  parable  in  the  mouth  of  fools." 
Stuart  renders:  "As  a  thornbush  which  is  elevated  [riseth  up,  Zuck- 
ler]  ill  the  hand  of  a  drunkard,  so  is  a  ])roverb  in  the  mouth  of  a 
fool,"  and  he  explains  as  follows:  "As  a  drunken  man,  who  holds  a 
high  thornbush  in  his  hand,  will  be  very  apt  to  injure  others  or 
himself,  so  a  fool's  words  will  injure  himself  or  others."^  But  Co- 
nant  translates  and  explains  the  passage  thus:  "A  thorn  comes  up 

'  Prof.  Pluinptrc  in  the  Speaker's  Commentary  on  Proverbs  (Am.  cil.)-     Introduc. 
tion,  p.  514. 

*  Commentary  on  Proverbs,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  331 

into  tile  drunkard's  hand,  so  is  a  proverb  in  the  mouth  of  fools.  ,  .  . 
The  drunkard's  hand,  as  he  gropes  around,  blindly  grasping  at 
whatever  comes  in  his  way,  is  pierced  by  a  thorn.  So  fares  the 
fool  when  he  awkwardly  attempts  to  apply  some  sharp  saying  of 
the  wise."  The  enigmatical  character  of  the  next  verse  we  have 
already  noticed  (p.  269).  It  is  evident,  therefore,  from  this  variety 
in  the  nature  and  style  of  proverbs,  that  the  interpreter  should  be 
able  to  determine  the  exact  character  of  each  proverbial  passage 
which  he  essays  to  explain. 

(^,Xireat  critical  and  practical  sagacity  is  also  necessary  both  to 
determine  the  character  of  a  iH'overb  and  to  apprehend 

CriticQ.1  3.11  fl 

its  scope  and  bearing.  Many  proverbs  are  literal  state-  practical sasac- 
ments  of  fact,  the  results  of  observation  and  experience;  ^*^' 
as,  "  A  child  is  known  by  his  doings,  whether  pure  and  whether 
right  his  deed"  (Prov.  xx,  11).  Many  are  simple  precepts  and 
maxims  of  a  virtuous  life,  or  warnings  against  sin,  which  any  one 
can  understand,  as,  "  Trust  in  Jehovah  with  all  thy  heart,  and  upon 
thine  own  understanding  do  not  rely  "  (Prov.  iii,  5).  "  In  the  path  of 
the  wicked  come  thou  not,  and  proceed  not  in  the  way  of  the  evil " 
(Prov.  iv,  14).  But  there  are  other  proverbs  that  seem  to  defy  all 
critical  sharpness  and  ingenuity,  as,  "  To  eat  much  honey  is  not 
good,  and  to  search  out  their  glory  is  glory"  (Prov.  xxv,  27).  The 
last  clause  has  been  a  puzzle  to  all  exegetes.  Some,  as  the  Author- 
ized Vei-sion,  carry  over  the  negative  particle  from  the  preceding 
sentence,  and  so  make  the  author  say  the  precise  opposite  of  what 
he  does  say.  Others  reject  the  usus  loquencU  of  the  verb  "ipn,  to 
search  out,  and,  appealing  to  the  corresponding  Arabic  root,  make 
the  Avord  mean  to  desjyise:  "To  despise  their  glory  is  glory." 
Others  take  the  Avord  "ii3|i,  glory,  in  its  radical  sense  of  weight :  "  To 
search  into  weighty  matters  is  itself  a  weight;  i.  e.,  men  soon  be- 
come satiated  with  it  as  with  honey  "  (Plumptre).  Zucklcr  renders: 
"To  search  out  the  diflicult  bringeth  difficulty;"  Stuart:  "Search- 
ing after  one's  own  glory  is  burdensome."  Others  suggest  an  emen- 
dation of  the  text.  Amid  such  a  diversity  of  possible  constructions 
the  sagacious  critic  will  be  slow  to  venture  a  positive  judgment. 
He  will  consider  how  many  such  obscure  sayings  have  arisen  from 
events  now  utterly  forgotten.  Their  whole  point  and  force  may 
have  depended  originally  upon  some  incident  like  that  of  Saul 
prophesying,  or  upon  some  provincial  idiom.  So,  again,  the  myste- 
rious word  nj^ipy,  in  Prov.  xxx,  15,  translated  horseleech  in  all  the 
ancient  versions,  and  vampire  by  many  modern  exegetes,  gives  an 
uncertainty  to  every  exposition.  Possibly  here  the  text  is  corrupt, 
and  we  may  take  the  word  Alukah  as  a  proper  name,  like  Agur  in 


332  PRINCIPLES   OF 

verse  1,  and  Lemuel  in  chap,  xxxi,  1.  Then  we  woulrl  supply  some- 
tliing,  as,  "Words  of  Alukah,"  or,  "Words  which  one  spoke  to 
Ahikah."  It  will,  at  least,  be  granted  that  among  so  many  prov- 
erbs as  have  been  preserved  to  us  in  the  Scriptures,  several  of  which 
were  manifestly  designed  to  puzzle,  there  are  probably  some  which 
can  now  be  only  conjecturally  explained. 

(3.'  Wherever  the  context  lends  any  help  to  the  exposition  of  a 
Context  and  pvoverb  great  deference  is  to  be  paid  to  it,  and  it  is  to 
paraueiism.  |j(>  noted  that  in  the  Book  of  Proverbs,  as  in  the  other 
Scriptures,  the  immediate  context  is,  for  tlie  most  part,  a  very  safe 
guide  to  the  meaning  of  each  particular  passage.  So,  also,  the 
poetic  parallelisms,  in  which  this  book  is  written,  help  greatly  in 
the  exposition.  The  synonymous  and  the  antithetic  parallelisms, 
especially,  are  adapted,  by  way  of  the  analogies  and  contrasts  they 
furnish,  to  suggest  their  own  meaning  from  within  themselves. 
Thus  Prov.  xi,  25:  "The  soul  of  blessing  (liberal  soul  that  is  a 
blessing  to  others)  shall  become  fat  (enriched),  and  he  that  waters 
shall  also  himself  be  watered."  Here  the  second  member  of  the 
parallelism  is  a  metaphorical  illustration  of  the  somewhat  enigmat- 
ical sentiment  of  the  first.  So,  again,  in  the  antithetic  j^arallelism 
of  Prov.  xii,  24,  each  member  is  metaphorical,  and  the  sense  of  each 
is  made  clearer  by  the  contrast:  "The  hand  of  the  diligent  shall 
bear  rule,  but  the  slothful  shall  be  under  tribute." 

('4}  But  there  are  passages  in  the  Book  of  Proverbs  where  the  con- 
text affords  no  certain  or  satisfactory  heli).  There  are 
Cominon    sense  •'        .  ^ 

and  sound  jurtg-  passages  that  seem  at  first  self -contradictory,  and  we 
"'^"^'  are   obliged  to  pause    awhile   to    judge    whether   the 

language  be  literal  or  figurative.  "  There  is,"  says  Stuart,  "  scarce- 
ly any  book  which  calls  upon  us  so  often  to  apply  the  golden  mean 
between  literality  on  the  one  hand  and  flimsy  and  diffuse  general- 
ity on  the  other."  '  Especially  must  common  sense  and  sound  judg- 
ment be  appealed  to  where  t)ther  helps  are  not  at  hand.  These  are, 
in  all  doubtful  cases,  to  be  our  last  resort  to  guard  us  against  con- 
struing all  proverbs  as  universal  propositions.  Prov.  xvi,  7,  ex- 
presses a  great  truth:  "  When  Jehovah  delights  in  the  ways  of  a 
man  he  makes  even  his  enemies  to  be  at  peace  with  him."  But 
there  have  been  many  exceptions  to  this  statement,  and  many  cases 
to  which  it  could  apply  only  with  considerable  modification.  Such, 
to  some  extent,  have  been  all  cases  of  persecution  for  righteous- 
ness' sake.  So,  too,  with  verse  13  of  the  same  chapter:  "  Delight 
of  kings  are  lips  of  righteousness,  and  him  that  speaks  right  thini^s 
he  will  love."  The  annals  of  human  history  show  that  this  has  not 
'  Commentary  ou  Proverbs.     Introduction,  p.  128. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  383 

always  been  true;  and  yet  the  most  impious  kings  understand  the 
value  of  upright  counsellors.  Prov.  xxvi,  4  and  5,  are  contradictory 
in  form  and  statement,  but,  for  reasons  there  given,  both  are  at  once 
seen  to  be  true:  "Answer  not  a  fool  according  to  his  folly,  lest  thou 
also  be  like  unto  him.  Answer  a  fool  according  to  his  folly,  lest  he 
become  wise  in  his  own  eyes."  A  man's  good  sense  and  judgment 
must  decide  how  to  answer  in  any  particular  case.  Prov.  vi,  30,  31, 
has  been  supposed  to  involve  an  absurdity:  "They  do  not  despise 
a  thief  when  he  steals  to  satisfy  his  soul  when  he  is  hungry ;  but  if 
found  he  shall  restore  sevenfold,  the  whole  substance  of  his  house 
shall  he  give."  Theft  is  theft  in  any  case,  but  if  a  man  is  so  im- 
poverished as  to  steal  to  satisfy  hunger,  wherewithal,  it  is  asked, 
can  he  be  made  to  restore  sevenfold?  Whence  all  that  substance 
of  his  house  ?  The  absurdities  here  alleged  arise  from  a  lack  of 
knowledge  of  Hebrew  sentiment  and  law.  To  begin  with,  the  pas- 
sage is  proverbial,  and  must  be  taken  subject  to  proverbial  limita- 
tions. Then  the  context  must  be  kept  in  view,  in  which  the  writer 
is  aiming  to  shoAV  the  exceeding  wickedness  of  adultery.  No  one 
shall  be  innocent,  he  argues,  (ver.  29),  who  touches  his  neighbor's 
wife.  A  man  who  steals  to  satisfy  the  cravings  of  hunger  is  not 
despised,  for  the  palliating  circumstances  are  duly  considered;  nev- 
ertheless, if  discovered,  even  he  is  subject  to  the  full  penalty  of  the 
law  (comp.  Exod.  xxii,  1-4).  The  sevenfold  is,  doubtless,  to  be 
taken  idiomatically.  His  entire  property  shall  be  given  up,  if  nec- 
essary, to  make  due  restitution.  All  this  of  a  thief  under  the  cir- 
cumstances named.  But  an  adulterer  shall  find  even  a  worse  judg- 
ment— blows,  and  shame,  and  reproach  that  may  not  be  wiped  away 
(verses  32-35).  As  for  the  supposed  absurdity  of  compelling  a  man 
who  has  nothing  to  restore  sevenfold,  it  arises  from  an  absurdly 
literal  interpretation  of  the  proverb.  The  sense  evidently  is,  that 
whatever  the  circumstances  of  the  theft,  if  the  thief  be  found,  he 
shall  certainly  be  punished  as  the  case  may  demand.  A  man  might 
own  estates  and  yet  steal  to  satisfy  his  hunger;  or,  if  he  owned  no 
prop'erty,  he  could  be  sold  (Exod.  xxii,  3)  for  perhaps  more  than 
seven  times  the  value  of  what  he  had  stolen.  So,  also,  in  Eccles. 
x,  2,  it  is  at  once  evident  that  the  language  is  not  to  be  taken  liter- 
ally, but  metaphorically:  "The  heart  of  a  wise  man  is  on  his  right, 
but  the  heart  of  a  fool  on  his  left."  The  exact  meaning  of  the 
proverb,  however,  is  obscure.  Heart  is  probably  to  be  taken  for 
the  judgment  or  understanding,  and  the  sentiment  is  that  a  wise 
man  has  his  understanding  always  at  ready  and  vigorous  command, 
while  the  opposite  is  the  case  with  the  fool. 


334  PRINCIPLES   OF 


CHAPTER   XVI. 

INTERPRETATION    OF    TYPES. 

Types  and  symbols  constitute  a  class  of  figures  distinct  from  all 

those  which  Ave  have  treated  in  the  foreofoinsr  chapters: 
TypesandSvm-  ^  .  ' 

boisdeflnedaiKi  hut  they  are  not,  properly  speaking,  hgures  of  speech. 

distinguished,  rpj^gy  resemble  each  other  in  being  sensible  representa- 
tions of  moral  and  religious  truth,  and  may  be  defined,  in  general, 
as  figures  of  thought  in  which  material  objects  are  made  to  convey 
vivid  spiritual  conceptions  to  the  mind.  Crabb  defines  types  and 
symbols  as  different  species  of  the  emblem,  and  observes:  "The 
type  is  that  species  of  emblem  by  which  one  object  is  made  to 
represent  another  mystically;  it  is,  therefore,  only  employed  in 
religious  matters,  particularly  in  relation  to  the  coming,  the  oftice, 
and  the  death  of  our  Saviour;  in  this  manner  the  offering  of  Isaac 
is  considered  as  a  type  of  our  Saviour's  offering  himself  as  an 
atoning  sacrifice.  The  symbol  is  that  species  of  emblem  which  is 
converted  into  a  constituted  sign  among  men;  thus  the  olive  and 
laurel  are  the  symbols  of  peace,  and  have  been  recognized  as  such 
among  barbarous  as  well  as  enlightened  nations."  '  The  symbols 
of  Scripture,  however,  rise  far  above  the  conventional  signs  in 
common  use  among  men,  and  are  employed,  especially  in  the  apoc- 
alyptic portions  of  the  Bible,  to  set  forth  those  revelations,  given 
in  visions  or  dreams,  which  could  find  no  suitable  expression  in 
mere  words. 

Types  and  symbols  may,  therefore,  be  said  to  agree  in  their  gen- 
eral character  as  emblems,  but  they  differ  noticeably  in 
types  and  sym-  special  method  and  design.     Adam,  in  his  representa- 
°^'  tive  character  and  relation  to  the  human  race,  t^'as  a 

type  of  Christ  (Rom.  v,  14).  The  rainbow  is  a  symbol  of  the  cove- 
nanted mercy  and  faithfulness  of  God  (Gen.  ix,  13-lC;  Ezek.  i,  28; 
Rev.  iv,  3;  comp.  Isa.  liv,  8-10),  and  the  bread  and  wine  in  the 
sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  are  symbols  of  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ.  There  are  also  typical  events  like  the  passage  of  the 
Red  Sea  (1  Cor.  x,  1-11),  and  symbolico-typical  actions  like  Ahi- 
jah's  rending  his  new  garment  as  a  sign  of  the  rupture  of  the  king- 
dom of  Solomon  (1  Kings  xi,  29-31).     In  instances  like  the  latter 

'Engliali  Syiionynics,  p.  531.     New  York,  1859. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  335 

certain  essential  elements  of  both  type  and  symbol  become  blended 
in  one  and  the  same  example.  The  Scriptures  also  furnish  us  with 
examples  of  symbolical  metals,  names,  numbers,  and  colours. 

Certain  analogies  may  be  traced  between  types  and  symbols, 
and  several  figures  of  speech.  Symbols,  being  always  ^naiogybe- 
based  upon  some  points  of  resemblance  between  them-  tween  types 
selves  and  the  things  to  be  symbolized,  correspond  and  certain  fl<T- 
somewhat  closely  with  metonymy  of  the  adjunct,  or  ^^^^  ^^  speech, 
metonymy  of  the  sign  and  the  thing  signified  (comp.  above,  pp. 
249,  250).  Then  there  are  analogies  between  the  simile,  the  par- 
able, and  the  type,  on  the  one  hand,  and  between  the  metaphor, 
the  allegory,  and  the  symbol,  on  the  other.  Similes,  parables,  and 
types  have  this  in  common,  that  a  formal  comparison  is  made  or 
assumed  between  different  persons  and  events,  and  the  language  is 
employed  in  its  literal  sense;  but  in  metaphor,  allegory,  and  sym- 
bol, the  characteristic  feature  is  that  one  thing  is  said  or  seen, 
and  another  is  intended.  If  we  say  "Israel  is  like  a  barren  fig- 
tree,"  the  sentence  is  a  simile.  In  Luke  xiii,  6-9,  the  same  image 
is  expanded  into  a  narrative,  in  the  j^arable  of  the  fruitless  fig-tree.* 
But  our  Lord's  miracle  of  cursing  the  leafy  but  fruitless  fig-tree 
(Mark  xi,  13,  14)  was  a  symbolico-typical  action,  foreshadowing 
the  approaching  doom  of  the  Jewish  nation.  If,  however,  we 
say  "  Judah  is  an  olive-tree,"  we  have  a  metaphor  ;  one  thing 
is  said  to  be  another.  But  in  Jer.  xi,  16,  IV,  this  metaphor  is 
extended  into  an  allegory,  and  in  Zech.  iv,  3,  two  olive-trees  are 
symbols  of  Zerubbabel  and  Joshua,"  the  two  anointed  ones  (He- 
brew, sons  of  oil)  who  stand  by  the  Lord  of  all  the  earth"  (ver,  14). 
At  the  same  time  it  is  to  be  observed  that  as  the  metaphor  differs 
from  the  simile  in  being  an  implied  rather  than  a  formal  compari- 
son, and  as  the  allegory  differs  from  the  parable  in  a  similar  way — 
saying  one  thing  and  meaning  another — so  the  symbol  differs  from 
the  type  in  being  a  suggestive  sign  rather  than  an  image  of  that 
which  it  is  intended  to  represent.  The  interpretation  of  a  type  re- 
quires us  to  show  some  formal  analogy  between  two  persons,  ob- 
jects, or  events;  that  of  a  symbol  requires  us  rather  to  point  out 
the  particular  qualities,  marks,  features,  or  signs  by  means  of  which 
one  object,  real  or  ideal,  indicates  and  illustrates  another.  Mel- 
chizedek  is  a  type,  not  a  symbol,  of  Christ,  and  Ileb.  vii  fur- 
nishes a  formal  statement  of  the  typical  analogies.  But  the  seven 
golden  candlesticks  (Rev.  i,  12)  are  a  symbol,  not  a  type,  of  the 
seven  churches  of  Asia.  The  comparison,  however,  is  implied,  not 
expressed,  and  it  is  left  to  the  interpreter  to  unfold  it,  and  show  the 
points  of  resemblance. 


336  PRINCIPLES   OF 

Besides  these  formal  distinctions  between  types  and  symbols 
there  is  the  more  radical  and  fundamental  difference  that  while  a 
symbol  may  represent  a  thing  either  past,  present,  or  future,  a  type 
Natural dis-  is  essentially  a  prefiguring  of  something  future  from 
ti  net  ion  be-  itg^jf  j^  the  technical  and  theological  sense  a  type  is 
and  symbols,  a  fio-ure  or  adumbration  of  that  which  is  to  come.  It 
is  a  person,  institution,  office,  action,  or  event,  by  means  of  which 
some  truth  of  tlio  Gospel  was  divinely  foreshadowed  under  the  Old 
Testament  dispensations.  Whatever  was  thus  prefigured  is  called 
the  antitype.'  A  symbol,  on  the  other  hand,  has  in  itself  no  essen- 
tial reference  to  thne.  It  is  designed  rather  to  represent  some 
character,  office,  or  quality,  as  when  a  horn  denotes  either  strength 
or  a  king  in  whom  strength  is  impersonated  (Dan.  vii,  24;  viii,  21). 
The  origin  of  symbols  has  been  supposed  to  be  connected  with  the 
history  of  hierogly])hics." 

"  The  word  type^''  observes  Muenscher,  "  is  employed  not  only 
in  theology,  but  in  philosophy,  medicine,  and  other  sci- 
acteristics     of   ences  and  arts.     In  all  these  departments  of  knowledge 
^hetjpe.  ^j^g  radical  idea  is  the  same,  while  its  sj)ecific  meaning 

varies  with  the  subject  to  which  it  is  applied.  Resemblance  of 
some  kind,  real  or  supposed,  lies  at  the  foundation  in  every  case. 
In  the  science  of  theology  it  properly  signifies  the  2yreordalned  rep- 
resentative relation  xohich  certain  persons,  events,  and  institutions  of 
the  Old  Testament  hear  to  corresponding  persons,  events,  and  institu- 
tions in  the  JVew."  °  Accordingly  the  type  is  always  something  real, 
not  a  fictitious  or  ideal  symbol.  And,  further,  it  is  no  ordinary  fact 
or  incident  of  history,  but  one  of  exalted  dignity  and  worth — one  di- 
vinely ordained  by  the  omniscient  Ruler  to  be  a  foreshadowing  of 
the  good  things  which  he  purposed  in  the  fulness  of  time  to  bring- 
to  pass  through  the  mediation  of  Jesus  Christ.^     Three  things  are, 

'  It  should  be  observed,  however,  that  this  word  (avrlrvnov),  as  used  in  the  New 
Testament  (Heb.  ix,  21;  1  Peter  iii,  21),  is  not  equivalent  to  the  technical  sense  of 
antitype,  or  counterpart,  as  now  used  in  theological  literature.  It  has  the  more  gen- 
eral meaning  of  imac/c  or  likeness. 

^  Comp.  Warburton,  Divine  Legation  of  Moses,  book  iv,  sect,  iv, 

^  Types  and  the  Typical  Interpretation  of  Scripture.  Article  in  the  American  Bib- 
lical Keiiository  for  January,  1811,  p.  97. 

*  In  the  New  Testament  the  word  rvKog,  type,  is  applied  variouslj',  but  always  with 
the  fundamental  idea  of  a  figure  or  real  form.  In  John  xx,  25,  it  is  used  of  the 
print  of  the  nails  in  the  Saviour's  hands — visible  marks  which  identified  him  as  the 
crucified.  In  Acts  vii,  4.'5,  it  denotes  idolatrous  images,  and  in  verse  11,  and  Ileb. 
viii,  .5,  the  pattern  or  model  after  wliith  the  tabernacle  was  made.  In  Acts  xxiii,  25, 
it  denotes  the  form  or  style  of  a  letter,  and  in  Rom.  vi,  lY,  a  form  of  doctrine. 
Comp.  v-jTOTviTuaLr  in  2  Tim.  i,  13.  In  Phil,  iii,  17;  1  Thess.  i,  7;  2  Thess.  iii,  9; 
1  Tim.  iv,  12;  Titus  ii,  7 ;   1  Peter  v,  3,  the  word  is  used  in  the  sense  of  an  example 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  337 

accordingly,  essential   to  make  one  person  or  event  the   type  of 
another. 

1.  There  must  be  some  notable  point  of  resemblance  or  analogy 
between  the  two.  They  may,  in  many  respects,  be  to-  uijeness  and 
tally  dissimilar.  In  fact  it  is  as  essential  that  there  be  uniikeness. 
points  of  dissimilarity  as  that  there  be  some  notable  analogy,  other- 
wise we  should  have  identity  where  only  a  resemblance  is  designed. 
Adam,  for  instance,  is  made  a  type  of  Christ,  but  only  in  his  head- 
ship of  the  race,  as  the  first  representative  of  humanity;  and  in 
Rom.  V,  14-20,  and  1  Cor.  xv,  45-49,  the  apostle  notes  more  points 
of  uniikeness  than  of  agreement  between  the  two.  Moreover,  we 
always  expect  to  find  in  the  antitype  something  higher  and  nobler 
than  in  the  type,  for  "  much  greater  honour  than  the  house  has  he 
who  built  it "  (Heb.  iii,  3). 

^2.  There  must  be  evidence  that  the  type  was  designed  and  ap- 
pointed by  God  to  represent  the  thing  typified.  This  Divinely  ap- 
proposition  is  maintained  with  great  unanimity  by  the  poiot^ed. 
best  writers  on  scriptural  typology.  "  To  constitute  one  thing  the 
type  of  another,"  says  Bishoi^  Marsh,  "  something  more  is  wanted 
than  mere  resemblance.  The  former  must  not  only  resemble  the 
latter,  but  must  have  been  designed  to  resemble  the  latter.  It 
must  have  been  so  designed  in  its  original  institution.  It  must 
have  been  designed  as  something  preparatory  to  the  latter.  The 
type  as  well  as  the  antitype  must  have  been  pre-ordained,  and  they 
must  have  been  pre-ordained  as  constituent  2:)arts  of  the  same  gen- 
eral scheme  of  divine  providence." '  "  It  is  essential  to  a  type," 
says  Van  Mildert,  "  in  the  scriptural  adaptation  of  the  term,  that 
there  should  be  competent  evidence  of  the  divine  intention  in  the 
^correspondence  between  it  and  the  antitype — a  matter  not  to  be 
left  to  the  imagination  of  the  expositor  to  discover,  but  resting  on 

or  pattern  of  Christian  character  and  conduct.  But  the  more  technical  theological 
sense  of  the  word  appears  in  Rom.  v,  14,  where  Adam  is  called  a  "  type  of  him  who 
was  to  come."  On  this  passage  Meyer  remarks :  "  The  type  is  always  something  his- 
torical (a  person,  tiling,  saying)  which  is  destined,  in  accordance  with  tlie  divine  plan 
to  prefigure  something  corresponding  to  it  in  the  future — in  the  connected  scheme  of 
sacred  historical  teleology,  which  is  to  be  discerned  from  the  standpoint  of  the  anti- 
type." The  word  is  used  in  the  same  sense  in  1  Cor.  x,  6 :  "  These  things  (the  ex- 
periences of  the  fathers,  verses  1-5)  became  types  of  us."  That  is,  says  Meyer,  they 
were  "  historical  transactions  of  the  Old  Testament,  guided  and  shaped  by  God,  and 
designed  by  him,  figuratively,  to  represent  the  corresponding  relation  and  experience 
on  the  part  of  Christians."  In  verse  11  of  the  same  chapter  we  have  the  word  rvm- 
Kuc,  typically,  or,  after  the  manner  of  type  ;  and  it  here  bears  essentially  the  same 
sense  as  verse  6.  "  These  things  came  to  pass  typically  with  them ;  and  it  was 
"written  for  our  admonition  upon  whom  the  ends  of  the  ages  fl,re  come." 
'  Lectures  on  Sacred  Criticism  and  Interpretation,  p.  371.  Lond.,  1838. 
22 


338  PRINCIPLES   OF 

some  solid  proof  from  Scripture  itself." '  But  we  should  guard 
ao-ainst  the  extreme  position  of  some  writers  who  declare  that  noth- 
ing  in  the  Old  Testament  is  to  be  regarded  as  typical  but  what  the 
New  Testament  affirms  to  be  so.  We  admit  a  divine  purpose  in 
every  real  type,  but  it  does  not  therefore  follow  that  every  such 
purpose  must  be  formally  affirmed  in  the  Scriptures. 
/  3'.  The  type  must  prefigure  something  in  the  future.  It  must 
ForeshadowinR  ^crvc  in  the  divine  economy  as  a  shadow  of  things  to 
of  the  future,  comc  (Col.  ii,  17  ;  Heb.  x,  1).  Hence  it  is  that  sacred 
typology  constitutes  a  specific  form  of  prophetic  revelation.  The 
Old  Testament  dispensations  were  preparatory  to  the  New,  and 
contained  many  things  in  germ  which  could  fully  blossom  only 
in  the  light  of  the  Gospel  of  Jesus.  So  the  law  was  a  school- 
master to  bring  men  to  Christ  (Gal.  iii,  24).  Old  Testament  char- 
acters, offices,  institutions,  and  events  were  prophetic  adumbrations 
of  corresponding  realities  in  the  Church  and  kingdom  of  Christ. 

The  principal  types  of  the  Old  Testament  may  be  distributed  into 
five  different  classes,  as  follows : 

1.  Typical  Persons.  It  is  to  be  noted,  however,  that  persons  are 
typical,  not  as  persons,  but  because  of  some  character  or  relation 
which  they  sustain  in  the  history  of  redemption.  Adam  was  a  type 
Typical  Per-  ^^  Christ  because  of  his  representative  character  as  the 
sons.  first  man,  and  federal  head  of  the  race   (Rom.  v,  14). 

"  As  through  the  disobedience  of  the  one  man  the  many  were  made 
sinners,  so  also  through  the  obedience  of  the  one  the  many  shall  be 
made  righteous"  (Rom.  v,  19).  "The  first  man  Adam  became  a 
living  soul;  the  last  Adam  a  life-giving  spirit"  (1  Cor.  xv,  45). 
Enoch  may  be  regarded  as  a  type  of  Christ,  in  that,  by  his  saintly 
life  and  translation  he  brought  life  and  immortality  to  light  to  the 
antediluvian  world.  Elijah  the  Tishbite  was  made,  in  the  same 
way,  a  type  of  the  ascending  Lord,  and  these  two  were  also  types 
of  God's  power  and  purpose  to  change  his  living  saints,  "  in  a  mo- 
ment, in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye,  at  the  last  trump"  (1  Cor.  xv,  52). 
In  the  spirit  and  power  of  his  prophetic  ministry  Elijah  was  also  a 
type  of  John  the  Baptist.  Abraham's  faith  in  God's  word,  and 
consequent  justification  (Gen.  xv,  G),  while  yet  in  uncircumcision 
(Rom.  iv,  10),  made  him  a  type  of  all  believers  who  are  justified  by 
faith  "apart  from  works  of  law"  (Rom.  iii,  28).  His  offering  of 
Isaac,  at  a  later  date  (Gen.  xxii),  made  him  a  type  of  working  faith, 
showing  how  "a  man  is  justified  by  Avorks  and  not  by  faith  only" 
(James  ii,  24).  Typical  relations  may  also  be  traced  in  Melchizedek, 
Joseph,  Moses,  Joshua,  David,  Solomon,  and  Zerubbabel. 

'Bampton  Lectures  for  1814,  p.  239. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  339 

2,  Typical  Institutions.  The  sacrificing  of  lambs  and  other  ani- 
mals, the  blood  of  which  was  appointed  to  make  atone-  Typical  insu- 
ment  for  the  souls  of  men  (Lev.  xvii,  11),  was  typical  tutions. 
of  the  offering  of  Christ,  who,  "  as  a  lamb  without  blemish  and 
without  spot"  (1  Pet.  i,  19),  was  "once  offered  to  bear  the  sins  of 
many"  (Heb.  ix,  28).  The  sabbath  is  a  type  of  the  believer's  ever- 
lasting rest  (Heb.  iv,  9).  The  provision  of  cities  of  refuge,  into 
which  the  manslayer  might  escape  (Num.  xxxv,  9-34),  was  typical 
of  the  provisions  of  the  Gospel  by  which  the  sinner  may  be  saved 
from  death.  The  Old  Testament  passover  was  typical  of  the  New- 
Testament  eucharist,  and  the  feast  of  tabernacles  a  foreshadowing  of 
the  universal  thanksgiving  of  the  Church  of  the  latter  day  (comp. 
Zech.  xiv,  IG).  The  Old  Testament  theocracy  itself  was  a  type  and 
shadow  of  the  more  glorious  New  Testament  kingdom  of  God. 

3. /Typical  Offices.  Every  holy  prophet  of  the  Old  Testament, 
by  being  the  medium  of  divine  revelation,  and  a  mes- 
senger sent  forth  from  God,  was  a  type  of  Christ.  It  '^^p*^'^' ^^ices. 
was  in  the  office  of  prophet  that  Moses  was  a  type  of  Jesus  (Deut. 
xviii,  15).  The  priests,  and  especially  the  high  priest,  in  the  per- 
formance of  their  priestly  duties,  were  types  of  Him  who  through 
his  own  blood  entered  into  the  holy  place  once  for  all,  and  thereby 
obtained  eternal  redemption  (Heb.  iv,  14;  ix,  12).  Christ  is  also, 
as  king,  the  antitype  of  Melchizedek,  who  was  king  of  righteous- 
ness and  king  of  peace  (Heb.  vii,  2),  and  of  David  and  Solomon, 
and  of  every  other  of  whom  Jehovah  might  say,  "  I  have  set  my 
king  upon  my  holy  hill  of  Zion"  (Psa.  ii,  6).  So  the  Lord  Christ 
unites  in  himself  the  offices  of  prophet,  priest,  and  king,  and  fulfills 
the  types  of  former  dispensations. 

/4.)  Typical  Events.     Under  this  head  we  may  name  the  flood,  the 
exodus  from  Egypt,  the  soiourn  in  the  wilderness,  the 

"       .u  1         r         ^        j:  ^1,  I       Typical  Events. 

giving  oi  manna,  the  supply  oi  Avater  from  the  rock, 
the  lifting  up  of  the  brazen  serpent,  the  conquest  of  Canaan,  and 
the  restoration  from  the  Babylonish  captivity.  It  is  such  events 
and  experiences  as  these,  according  to  Paul  (1  Cor,  x,  11),  which 
"  came  to  pass  typically  with  them :  and  it  was  written  for  our  ad- 
monition upon  whom  the  ends  of  the  ages  are  come." 
(5.^  Typical  Actions.     These  partake  so  largely  of  the  nature  of 

symbols  that  we  may  appropriately  designate  them  as 

■,     ,-       ^       .      .  -,  .  .  ,  ,      ^,  Typical  Actions, 

symbolico-typical,  and  treat  them  m  a  chapter  by  them- 
selves.    So  far  as  they  were  prophetic  of  things  to  come  they  were 
types,  and  belong  essentially  to  what  we  have  defined  as  typical 
events ;  so  far  as  they  were  signs  (niDJ*,  07]fj,ela),  suggestive  of  lessons 
of  present  or  permanent  value,  they  were  symbols.     Tlie  symbol 


840  PKINCIPLES   OF 

may  be  a  mere  outward  visible  sign;  the  type  always  requires 
the  presence  and  action  of  an  intelligent  agent.  So  it  should  be 
noted  that  typical  characters,  institutions,  offices,  or  events  ai-e 
such  by  bringing  in  the  activity  or  service  of  some  intelligent 
agent.  The  brazen  serpent,  considered  merely  as  a  sign — an  ob- 
ject to  look  to — was  rather  a  symbol  than  a  type ;  but  the  per- 
sonal agency  of  Moses  in  lifting  up  the  serpent  on  a  pole,  and  the 
looking  upon  it  on  the  })art  of  the  bitten  Israelites,  places  the  whole 
transaction  properly  in  the  class  of  typical  events;  for  as  such  it 
w;is  mainly  a  foreshadowing  of  things  to  come.  The  miracle  of  the 
fleece,  in  Judges  vi,  36-40,  was  not  so  much  a  type  as  a  symbolical 
sign,  an  extraordinary  miraculous  token,  and  our  Lord  cites  the 
case  of  Jonah,  who  was  three  days  and  three  nights  in  the  whale, 
not  only  as  a  prophetic  type  of  his  burial  and  resurrection,  but  also 
as  a  symbolical  "  sign  "  for  that  "  evil  and  adulterous  generation  " 
(^latt.  xii,  39).  The  symbolico-typical  actions  of  the  prophets  are: 
Isaiah's  walking  naked  and  barefoot  for  three  years  (Isa.  xx,  2-4) ; 
Jeremiah  taking  and  hiding  his  girdle  by  the  Euphrates  (Jer.  xiii, 
1-11);  his  going  to  the  potter's  house  and  observing  the  work 
wrought  there  (xviii,  1-6) ;  his  breaking  the  pottei-'s  bottle  in  the 
valley  of  Hinnom  (xix) ;  his  putting  a  yoke  upon  his  neck  for  a 
sign  to  the  nations  (xxvii,  1-14;  comp.  xxviii,  10-17);  and  his  hid- 
ing the  stones  in  the  brick-kiln  (xliii,  8-13) ;  Ezekiel's  portraiture 
upon  a  brick  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  and  his  lying  upon  his  side 
for  many  days  (Ezek.  iv) ;  his  cutting  off  his  hair  and  beard,  and 
destroying  it  in  different  p:ircels  (v) ;  his  removing  the  baggage, 
and  eating  and  drinking  with  trembling  (xii,  3-20) ;  his  sighing 
(xxi,  6,  1) ;  and  his  peculiar  action  on  the  death  of  his  wife  (xxiv, 
15-27);  Ilosea's  man-ying  "a  wife  of  whoredoms  and  children  of 
whoredoms"  (IIos.  i),  and  his  buying  an  adulteress  (iii) ;  and  Zech- 
ariah's  making  crowns  of  silver  and  gold  for  the  head  of  Joshua 
(Zech.  vi,  9-15). 

The  hermeneutical  principles  to  be  used  in  the  interpretation  of 
X,   ,   types  are  essentially  the  same  as  those  \ised  in  the  in- 

Hcrmeneutlcal  . 

principles  to  be  terpretation  of  parables  and  allegories.  Neverth(.'less, 
o  aurve  .  jj^  view  of  the  peculiar  nature  and  purpose  of  the  scrip- 

tural types,  we  should  be  careful  in  the  application  of  the  following 
principles: 
^1.  The  real   point   of   resemblance  between  type  and    antitype 

should,  first  of  all,  1)e  clearly  apprehended,  and  all  far- 
All  real  corre-  '  '  .  *  . 

spondcnces  to  fetched  and  recondite  analogies  should  be  as  carefully 

'^  ""''^  ■  avoided.     It  often  requires  the  exercise  of  a  very  sober 

discrimination  to  determine  the  proper  api)lication   of   this   rule. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  841 

Every  real  correspondence  should  be  noted.  Thus,  the  lifting  up 
of  tlie  brazen  serpent,  narrated  in  Num.  xxi,  4-9,  is  one  ^jj^  brazen 
of  the  most  notable  types  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  was  serpent. 
explained  by  Jesus  himself  as  a  prefiguration  of  his  being  lifted  u]) 
upon  the  cross  (John  iii,  14,  15).  Three  points  of  analogy  are  clear- 
ly traceable:  (1)  As  the  brazen  serpent  was  lifted  up  upon  a  i)ol(\ 
so  Christ  upon  the  cross.  (2)  As  the  serpent  of  brass  was  made, 
by  divine  order,  in  the  likeness  of  the  fiery  serpents,  so  Christ  was 
made  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh  (Rom.  viii,  3)  a  curse  for  us 
(Gal,  iii,  13).  (3)  As  the  offending  Israelites,  bitten  and  ready  to 
die,  looked  unto  the  serpent  of  brass  and  lived,  so  sinful  men,  poi- 
soned by  the  old  serpent,  the  devil,  and  ready  to  perish,  look  hj 
faith  to  the  crucified  Christ,  and  are  made  alive  for  evermore. 
Other  incidental  analogies  involved  in  one  or  another  of  these  three 
may  be  allowed,  but  should  be  used  with  caution.  Thus,  Bengel 
says:  "As  that  serpent  was  one  without  venom  placed  over  against 
venomous  serpents,  so  the  man  Christ,  a  man  without  sin,  against 
the  old  serpent." '  This  thought  may  be  incidentally  included  in  anal- 
ogy (2)  above.  Lange's  observation,  however,  seems  too  far-fetched 
and  mystical:  "The  fiery  serpents  in  the  wilderness  were  primarily 
the  form  of  a  divine  punishment,  presented  in  a  form  elsewhere  de- 
noting sin.  The  elevated  serpent-standard  was  thus  the  type  of 
punishment  lifted  in  the  phantom  of  sin,  and  transformed  into  a 
means  of  sah^ation.  This  is  the  nature  of  the  cross.  The  look  at 
the  cross  is  a  look  at  the  curse-laden  One,  who  is  not  a  sinner,  but 
a  divine  token  of  evil  and  penalty,  and  of  the  suffering  of  [a  sub- 
stitute for]  penalty  which  is  holy,  and  therefore  transformed  into 
deliverance.""  Such  incidental  analogies,  as  long  as  they  adlicre 
consistently  to  the  main  points,  may  be  allowed,  especially  in  homi- 
letical  discourse.  But  to  find  in  the  brass — a  metal  inferior  to  gold 
or  silver — a  type  of  the  outward  meanness  of  the  Saviour's  appear- 
ance ;  or  to  suppose  that  it  was  cast  in  a  mould,  not  wrought  by 
hand,  and  thus  typified  the  divine  conception  of  Christ's  human 
nature ;  or  to  imagine  that  it  was  fashioned  in  the  shape  of  a  cross 
to  depict  more  exactly  the  form  in  which  Christ  was  to  suffer — 
these,  and  all  like  suppositions,  are  far-fetched,  misleading,  and  to 
be  rejected. 

In  Hebrews  vii  the  priesthood  of  Christ  is  illustrated  and  en- 
hanced by  typical  analogies  in  the  character  and  position  Meichizedek 
of  Melchizedek.  Four  ]ioints  of  resemblance  are  there  "■^^  Christ, 
set  forth.  (1)  Melchizedek  Avas  both  king  and  priest;  so  Christ. 
(2)  His  timelessness — being  without  recorded  parentage,  genealogy, 
^  Gnomon,  on  John  iii,  14.  ^  Commentary  on  John,  in  loco. 


342  PRINCIPLES   OF 

or  death — is  a  figure  of  tlie  perpetuity  of  Christ's  priesthoocl, 
{3)  Melchizedek's  superiority  over  Abraham  and  ovei*  the  Levitical 
l^riests  is  made  to  suggest  the  exalted  dignity  of  Christ.  (4)  Mel- 
chizedek's priesthood  was  not,  like  the  Levitical,  constituted  by 
formal  legal  enactment,  but  was  without  succession  and  without 
tribe  or  race  limitations;  so  Christ,  an  independent  and  universal 
priest,  abides  forever,  having  an  unchangeable  priesthood.  Much 
more  is  said  in  the  chapter  by  way  of  contrasting  Christ  with  the 
Levitical  priests,  and  the  manifest  design  of  the  writer  is  to  set 
forth  in  a  most  impressive  way  the  great  dignity  and  unchangeable 
perpetuity  of  the  priesthood  of  the  Son  of  God.  But  interpreters 
have  gone  wild  over  the  mysterious  character  of  Melchizedek,  yield- 
ing to  all  manner  of  speculation,  first,  in  attempting  to  answer  the 
question  "  Who  was  Melchizedek?"  and  second,  in  tracing  all  im- 
aginable analogies.  Whedon  observes  sensibly  and  aptly:  "Our 
opinion  is,  that  Melchizedek  was  nobody  but  himself;  himself  as 
simply  narrated  in  Gen.  xiv,  18-20;  in  which  narrative  both  David, 
in  Psa.  ex,  and  our  author  after  him,  find  every  point  they  specify 
in  making  him  a  king-priest,  typical  of  the  king-priesthood  of 
Christ.  Yet  it  is  not  in  the  person  of  Melchizedek  alone,  but  in  the 
grouping,  also,  of  circumstances  around  and  in  his  person,  that  the 
inspired  imagination  of  the  psalmist  finds  the  shadowing  points. 
Melchizedek,  in  Genesis,  suddenly  appears  upon  the  historic  stage, 
without  antecedents  or  consequents.  He  is  a  king-priest  not  of 
Judaism,  but  of  Gentilism  universally.  He  appears  an  unlineal 
priest,  without  father,  mother,  or  pedigree.  He  is  preceded  and 
succeeded  by  an  everlasting  silence,  so  as  to  present  neither  begin- 
ning nor  end  of  life.  And  he  is,  as  an  historic  picture,  forever 
there,  divinely  suspended,  the  very  image  of  a  perpetual  king-priest. 
It  is  thus  not  in  his  actual  unknown  reality,  but  in  the  Scripture 
jyresentation,  that  the  group  of  shadowings  appears.  It  is  by  opti- 
cal truth  only,  not  by  corporeal  facts,  that  he  becomes  a  picture, 
and  with  his  surroundings  a  tableau,  into  which  the  psalmist  first 
reads  the  concejjtion  of  an  adumbration  of  the  eternal  priesthood 
of  the  Messiah;  and  all  our  author  docs  is  to  develop  the  particulars 
whicli  are  in  mass  presupposed  by  the  psalmist." ' 
^^.yrhe  points  of  dilTerence  and  of  contrast  between  type  and 
Nolftijie  differ-  antitype  should  also  be  noted  by  the  interpreter.  The 
trasLsloteobl  ^^V^  ^'"^"^  ^^s  very  nature  must  be  inferior  to  the  anti- 
served.  type,  for  Ave  cannot  expect  the  shadow  to  equal  the 

substance.     "For,"  says  Fairbairn,  "as  the  typical  is  divine  truth 
on  a  lower  stage,   exhibited  by  means  of  outward  relations  and 
'  Commentary  on  New  Testament,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  343 

terrestrial  interests,  so,  when  making  the  transition  from  this  to  the 
antitypical,  we  must  expect  the  truth  to  appear  on  a  loftier  stage, 
and,  if  we  may  so  speak,  with  a  more  heavenly  aspect.  What  in 
the  one  bore  immediate  respect  to  the  bodily  life,  must  in  the  other 
be  found  to  bear  immediate  respect  to  the  spiritual  life.  While  in 
the  one  it  is  seen  and  temporal  objects  that  ostensibly  present 
themselves,  their  proper  counterpart  in  the  other  is  the  unseen  and 
eternaL — there,  the  outward,  the  present,  the  worldly;  here,  the 
inward,  the  future,  the  heavenly."  * 

The  New  Testament  writers  dilate  upon  these  differences  between 
type  and  antitype.  In  Heb.  iii,  1-6,  Moses,  considered  Moses  and 
as  the  faithful  apostle  and  servant  of  God,  is  repre-  Cbnst. 
sented  as  a  type  of  Christ,  and  this  typical  aspect  of  his  character 
is  based  upon  the  remark  in  Num.  xii,  V,  that  Moses  was  faithful  in 
all  the  house  of  God.  This  is  the  great  point  of  analogy,  but  the 
writer  immediately  goes  on  to  say  that  Jesus  is  "  worthy  of  more 
glory  than  Moses,"  and  instances  two  points  of  superiority:  (1)  Mo- 
ses was  but  a  part  of  the  house  itself  in  which  he  served,  but  Jesus 
is  entitled  to  far  greater  glory,  inasmuch  as  he  may  be  regarded  as 
the  builder  of  the  house,  and  much  greater  honour  than  the  house 
has  he  w^ho  built  or  established  it.  Further  (2),  Moses  was  faithful 
in  the  house  as  a  minister  (ver.  5),  but  Christ  as  a  son  over  the 
house.  Still  more  extensively  does  this  writer  enlarge  upon  the 
superiority  of  Christ,  the  great  High  Priest,  as  compared  with  the 
Levitical  priests  after  the  order  of  Aaron. 

In  Rom.  V,  14,  Adam  is  declared  to  be  "  a  type  of  Him  who  was 
to  come,"  and  the  whole  of  the  celebrated  passage,  Adam  and 
verses  12-21,  is  an  elaboration  of  a  typical  analogy  Christ. 
which  has  force  only  as  it  involves  ideas  and  consequences  of  the 
most  opposite  character.  The  great  thought  of  the  j^assage  is  this: 
As  through  the  trespass  of  the  one  man  Adam  a  condemning  judg- 
ment, involving  death,  passed  upon  all  men,  so  through  the  right- 
eousness of  the  one  man,  Jesus  Christ,  the  free  gift  of  saving 
grace,  involving  justification  unto  life,  came  unto  all  men.  But  in 
verses  15-17  the  apostle  makes  prominent  several  points  of  distinc- 
tion in  which  the  free  gift  is  "  not  as  the  trespass."  First,  it  differs 
quorititively.  The  trespass  involved  the  one  irreversible  sentence 
of  death  to  the  many,  the  free  gift  abounded  with  manifold  pro- 
visions of  grace  to  the  same  many  [rovq  noXXovg).  It  differs  also 
numerically  in  the  matter  of  trespasses;  for  the  condemnation  fol- 
lowed one  act  of  transgression,  but  the  free  gift  provides  for  justi- 
fication from  many  trespasses.  Moreover,  the  free  gift  differs 
*The  Typology  of  Scripture,  vol.  i,  p.  131.     Philadelphia,  1867. 


344  PRINCIPLES   OF 

qualitatively  in  its  glorious  results.  By  the  trespass  of  Adam  "  death 
reigned  " — acquired  domination  over  all  men,  even  over  those  who 
sinned  not  after  the  likeness  of  the  transgression  of  Adam;  but 
through  the  one  man,  Jesus  Christ,  they  who  receive  the  abundance 
of  his  saving  grace  will  themselves  reign  in  eternal  life. 

3.  The  Old  Testament  types  are  susceptible  of  complete  interpre- 
oid  Testament  tation  only  by  the  light  of  the  Gospel.  It  has  too  often 
types     appre-  j^ggj^  hastily  assumed  that   the  ancient  prophets  and 

bended  only  by  •'  i       <.  /.  n    i  i     t 

the  Gospel.  holy  men  were  possessed  of  a  full  knowledge  or  the 
mysteries  of  Christ,  and  vividly  apprehended  the  profound  signiti- 
cance  of  all  sacred  types  and  symbols.  That  they  at  times  had 
some  idea  that  certain  acts  and  institutions  foreshadowed  better 
things  to  come  may  be  admitted,  but  according  to  Ileb.  ix,  7-12, 
the  meaning  of  the  holiest  mysteries  of  the  ancient  worship  was 
not  manifest  while  the  outward  tabernacle  was  yet  standing.  And 
not  only  did  the  ancient  worshippers  fail  to  understand  those  mys- 
teries, but  the  mysteries  themselves — the  forms  of  Avorship,  "  the 
meats,  and  drinks,  and  divers  washings,  ordinances  of  flesh,  imposed 
until  a  time  of  rectification  "  ((5iopi9a)crew5-,  straightening  tq?),^  were 
unable  to  make  the  Avorshippers  perfect.  In  short,  the  entire  Mo- 
saic cultus  Avas,  in  its  nature  and  purpose,  preparatory  and  peda- 
gogic (Gal.  iii,  25),  and  any  interpreter  Avho  assumes  that  the 
ancients  apprehended  clearly  what  the;  Gospel  reveals  in  the  Old 
Testament  types,  Avill  be  likely  to  run  into  extravagance,  and  in- 
volve himself  in  untenable  conclusions. 

We  may  appropriately  add  the  following  Avords  of  Cave:  "Hav- 
ing apprehended  that  the  divine  revelation  to  the  human  race  had 
been  made  at  successive  times  and  by  successive  stages,  the  doc- 
trine of  types  gave  utterance  to  the  further  apprehension  that  these 
reA^elations  AA'ere  not  incongruous  and  disconnected,  but  by  numer- 
ous links,  subtle  in  their  location,  and  by  concords  prearranged, 
were  inseparably  interAvoven.  To  the  belief  that  holy  men  had 
spoken  things  beyond  the  limits  of  human  thought,  the  doctrine  of 
types  superadded  or  testified  to  the  addition  of  the  belief  that 
these  holy  men  were  moved  by  one  Spirit,  their  utterances  having 
mysterious  interconnexions  Avith  each  other,  this  explaining  that, 
and  that  completing  this.  ...  It  is  this  community  of  system,  this 
fundamental  resemblance  under  different  forms,  Avhich  the  doctrine 
of  types  aids  us  to  apprehend.  Nor,  Avhen  once  the  conception  of 
the  historical  development  of  the  Scriptures  has  been  seized,  is  it 

'  That  is,  says  Alford,  "  when  all  these  things  would  be  better  arranged,  the  sub- 
stance put  where  the  shadow  was  before,  the  sufficient  grace  where  the  insufficient 
type."     Greek  Testament  on  Hcb.  ix,  lo. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  345 

any  longer  difficult  to  fix  the  precise  significance  of  the  type.  Type 
and  antitype  convey  exactly  the  same  truth,  but  under  forms  ap- 
propriate to  different  stages  of  development."  ' 

It  remains  for  us  to  inquire  into  the  validity  of  the  principle, 
maintained  by  many  writers,  that  only  those  persons  Limitation  of 
and  things  are  to  be  regarded  as  typical  which  are  ex-  ^JT'^®- 
pressly  declai-ed  to  be  such  in  the  New  Testament.  A  leading  au- 
thority for  this  view  is  Bishop  Marsh,  who  says:  "There  is  no 
other  rule  by  which  we  can  distinguish  a  real  from  a  pretended 
type,  than  that  of  Scripture  itself.  There  is  no  other  possible 
means  by  which  we  can  know  that  a  previous  design  and  a  pre- 
ordained connexion  existed.  Whatever  persons  or  Bishop  Marsh's 
things,  therefore,  recorded  in  the  Old  Testament,  were  ^^tum. 
especially  declared  by  Christ,  or  by  his  apostles,  to  have  been  de- 
signed as  prefigurations  of  persons  and  things  relating  to  the  New 
Testament,  such  j)ersons  and  things  so  recorded  in  the  former  ai'e 
types  of  the  persons  or  things  with  Avhich  they  are  compared  in 
the  latter.  But  if  we  assert  that  a  person  or  thing  was  designed  to 
prefigure  another  person  or  thing,  where  no  such  prefiguration  has 
been  declared  by  divine  authority,  we  make  an  assertion  for  which 
we  neither  have  nor  can  have  the  slightest  foundation.  And 
even  when  comparisons  are  instituted  in  the  New  Testament  be- 
tween antecedent  and  subsequent  persons  and  things,  we  must  be 
careful  to  distinguish  the  examples,  where  a  comparison  is  insti- 
tuted merely  for  the  sake  of  illustration,  from  the  examples  where 
such  a  connexion  is  declared  as  exists  in  the  relation  of  a  type  to 
its  antitype."  * 

This  principle,  however,  is  altogether  too  restrictive  for  an  ade- 
quate exposition  of  the  Old  Testament  types.  We  Marsh's  rule  too 
should,  indeed,  look  to  the  Scriptures  themselves  for  narrow. 
general  principles  and  guidance,  but  not  with  the  expectation  that 
every  type,  designed  to  prefigure  Gospel  truths,  must  be  formally 
announced  as  such.  We  might  with  equal  reason  demand  that 
every  parable  and  every  prophecy  of  Scripture  must  have  inspired 
and  authoritative  exposition.  Such  a  rigid  rule  of  interpretation 
could  scarcely  have  been  adopted  by  so  many  excellent  divines  ex- 
cept under  the  pressure  of  the  opposite  extreme,  which  found  hid- 
den meanings  and  typical  lessons  in  almost  every  fact  of  Scripture. 
The  persons  and  events  which  are  expressly  declared  by  the  sacred 

'  The  Scriptural  Doctrine  of  Sacrifice,  p.  157.     Edinb.,  187*7. 

*  Lectures  on  Sacred  Criticism  and  Interpretation,  p.  373.  This  extreme  view  is, 
in  substance,  affirmed  by  Macknight,  Ernesti,  Conybeare,  Van  Mildert,  Home,  Nares, 
Chevalier,  Stuart,  Stowe,  and  Mueuscher. 


3-iG  PRINCIPLES  OF 

writers  to  be  typical  are  rather  to  be  taken  as  specimens  and  ex- 
amples for  the  interpretation  of  all  types.  For  it  will  hardly  be 
deemed  reasonable  or  satisfactory  to  affirm  that  Moses  and  Jonah 
A  better  prin-  were  typical  characters  and  deny  such  character  to 
«ipie.  Samuel  and  Elisha.      The  miraculous  passage  of   the 

Jordan  may  have  as  profound  a  typical  significance  as  that  of  the 
Red  Sea,  and  the  sweetened  waters  of  the  desert  as  that  of  the 
smitten  rock  in  Horeb.  Our  Loi'd  rebuked  the  two  discii^les  for 
liaving  a  heart  so  dull  and  slow  to  believe  in  all  things  which  the 
prophets  spoke  (Luke  xxiv,  25),  clearly  implying  the  duty  of  seek- 
ing to  apprehend  the  sense  of  all  the  prophetic  Scriptures.  A  sim- 
ilar reproof  is  administered  to  the  Hebrews  (Heb.  v,  10-14)  for 
their  incapacity  to  understand  the  typical  character  of  Melchizedek, 
"thus  placing  it  beyond  a  doubt,"  says  Fairbairn,  "that  it  is  both 
the  duty  and  the  privilege  of  the  Church,  with  that  measure  of  the 
Spirit's  grace  which  it  is  the  part  even  of  private  Christians  to  pos- 
sess, to  search  into  the  types  of  ancient  Scripture  and  come  to  a 
correct  understanding  of  them.  To  deny  this  is  plainly  to  withhold 
an  important  privilege  from  the  Church  of  Christ,  to  dissuade  from 
it  is  to  encourage  the  neglect  of  an  incumbent  duty."  ' 

Such  Old  Testament  persons  and  events  as  are  cited  for  typical 
lessons  should  always,  however,  possess  some  notably  exceptional 
importance.  Some  have  taken  Abel,  as  a  keeper  of  sheep,  to  be  a 
type  of  Christ  the  great  Shepherd.  J5ut  a  score  of  others  might  as 
well  be  instanced,  and  the  analogy  is,  therefore,  too  common  to  be 
exalted  into  the  dignity  of  a  prefiguring  type*.  So,  also,  as  we  have 
said,  every  prophet,  priest,  and  king  of  the  Old  Testament,  consid- 
ering merely  their  offices,  were  types  of  Christ;  but  it  would  be 
improper  to  cite  every  one,  of  whom  we  have  any  recorded  history, 
as  a  type.  Only  exceptional  characters,  such  as  Moses,  Aaron,  and 
David,  are  to  be  so  used.  Each  case  must  be  determined  on  its 
own  merits  by  the  good  sense  and  sound  judgment  of  the  inter- 
preter; and  his  exegetical  discernment  must  be  disciplined  by  a 
thorough  study  of  such  characters  as  are  acknowledged  on  all  hands 
to  be  scriptural  types. 

'  Typology,  vol.  i,  page  29.  See  this  subject  more  amply  discussed  by  this  writer 
in  connexion  with  tlic  i)assage  above  (juoted  (pp.  26-32)  where  he  ably  show.<  that 
the  writers  belonging  to  the  school  of  Marsh  "  drop  a  golden  principle  for  the  sake  of 
avoiding  a  few  lawless  aberrations."  He  observes  that  their  system  of  procedure 
''sets  such  narrow  limits  to  our  inquiries  that  we  cannot,  indeed,  wander  far  into  the 
regions  of  extravagance.  But  in  the  very  prescription  of  these  limits  it  wrongfully 
Avithholds  from  us  the  key  of  knowledge,  and  shuts  us  up  to  evils  scarcely  less  to  be 
dcprccatc<l  than  those  it  seeks  to  correct." 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  347 


CHAPTER   XVII. 

INTERPRETATION    OF    SYMBOLS. 

Biblical  symbolism  is,  in  many  respects,  one  of  the  most  difficult 
subjects  with  which  the  interpreter  of  divine  revelation  Difficulties  of 
has  to  deal.  Spiritual  truths,  prophetic  oracles,  and  the  subject. 
things  unseen  and  eternal,  have  been  represented  enigmatically  in 
sacred  symbols,  and  it  appears  to  have  been  the  pleasure  of  the 
Great  Author  of  divine  revelation  that  many  of  the  deepest  mys- 
teries of  providence  and  grace  should  be  thus  enshrined.  And,  be- 
cause of  its  mystic  and  enigmatic  character,  this  whole  subject  of 
symbolism  demands  of  the  interpreter  a  sober  and  discriminating 
judgment,  a  most  delicate  taste,  a  thorough  collation  and  compari- 
son of  Scripture  symbols,  and  a  rational  and  self -consistent  pro- 
cedure in  their  explanation. 

The  proper  and  logical  method  of  investigating  the  principles  of 
symbolization  is  first  to  collate  a  sufficient  number  and  Principles  of 
variety  of  the  biblical  symbols,  especially  such  as  are  procedure. 
accompanied  by  an  authoritative  solution.  And  it  is  all-important 
that  we  do  not  admit  into  such  a  collation  any  objects  which  are 
not  veritable  symbols,  for  such  a  fundamental  fallacy  would  neces- 
sarily vitiate  our  whole  subsequent  procedure.  Having  brought 
together  in  one  field  of  view  a  goodly  number  of  unquestionable 
examples,  our  next  step  is  to  mark  carefully  the  principles  and 
methods  exhibited  in  the  exposition  of  those  symbols  which  are  ac- 
companied by  a  solution.  As,  in  the  interpretation  of  parables,  we 
make  the  expositions  of  our  Lord  a  main  guide  to  the  understand- 
ing of  all  parables,  so  from  the  solution  of  symbols  furnished  by 
the  sacred  writers  we  should,  as  far  as  possible,  learn  the  jjrinciples 
by  which  all  symbols  are  to  be  interpreted. 

It  is  scarcely  to  be  disputed  that  the  cherubim  and  flaming  sword 
placed  at  the  east  of  Eden  (Gen.  iii,  24),  the  burn-  classification  of 
ing  bush  at  Horeb  (Exod.  iii,  2),  and  the  pillars  of  symbols. 
cloud  and  fire  which  went  before  the  Israelites  (Exod,  xiii,  21) 
were  of  symbolical  import.  In  a  scientific  classification  of  symbols 
these  are,  perhaps,  sufficiently  exceptional  to  be  placed  by  them- 
selves, and  designated  as  miraculously  signal.  Other  symbols 
are  appropriately  named  material,  because  they  consist  of  material 


348  PRINCIPLES   OF 

objects,  as  the  blood  offered  in  expiatoiy  sacrifices,  the  bread  and 
wine  of  the  Eucharist,  and  the  tabernacle  and  temple  with  their 
apartments  and  furniture.  But  by  far  the  more  numerous  symbols 
are  the  visional,  including  all  such  as  were  seen  in  the  dreams  and 
visions  of  the  prophets.  Under  one  or  the  other  of  these  three 
heads  we  may  bring  all  the  biblical  symbols,  and  any  attempt  at 
a  more  minute  classification  would,  at  this  stage  of  our  investiga- 
tion, be  unnecessary  and  inexpedient.' 

As  the  visional  symbols  are  the  most  numerous  and  common. 
The  Almond  ^^^  many  of  them  have  special  explanations,  we  be- 
^^-  gin  with  these,  and  take  the  simplest  and  less  impor- 

tant first.  In  Jer.  i,  11,  the  prophet  is  represented  as  seeing  "a 
rod  of  an  almond  tree,"  which  is  at  once  explained  as  a  symbol  of 
the  active  vigilance  with  which  Jehovah  would  attend  to  the  per- 
formance of  his  n'ord.  The  key  to  the  explanation  is  found  in  the 
Hebrew  name  of  the  almond  tree,  IpU^,  which  Gesenius  defines  as 
"  the  waker,  so  called  as  being  the  earliest  of  all  trees  to  awake 
from  the  sleep  of  winter."  "  In  verse  12  the  Lord  appropriates 
this  word  in  its  verbal  form,  and  says:  "For  I  am  watching  (l|X') 
over  my  word  to  perform  it." 

*  Winthrop,  in  his  Essay  on  the  Characteristics  and  Laws  of  Prophetic  PTOibols 
(2d  ed.,  New  Yorii,  1854,  pp.  lG-19),  adopting  substantially  the  theory  of  Mr. 
D.  N.  Lord  (Theological  and  Literary  Journal  for  April,  1851,  p.  668),  divides  what 
he  regards  as  the  biblical  symbols  into  five  classes,  as  follows:  (1)  Living  conscious 
agents,  as  God,  the  Son  of  man,  the  Lamb,  angels,  men,  souls  (Rev.  vi,  9),  beasts, 
monster  animals,  and  insects ;  (2)  dead  bodies,  as  the  slain  witnesses  in  Rev.  xi ; 

(3)  natural  unconscious  agents  or  objects,  as  the  earth,  sun,  moon,  stars,  and  waters ; 

(4)  artificial  objects,  as  candlesticks,  sword,  cities,  books,  diadems,  and  white  robes ; 

(5)  acts,  effects,  characteristics,  conditions,  and  relations  of  agents  and  objects,  as 
speaking,  fighting,  and  colour.  But  a  large  proportion  of  the  agents  and  objects  he 
enumerates  are  not  symbols.  He  makes  God  and  Christ,  disembodied  souls,  I'isea 
saints,  and  living  men,  symbols  of  themselves !  Other  objects  named,  as  acts,  ef- 
fects, colours,  and  relations,  are  symbolical  only  as  they  form  part  of  a  composite 
image,  and  should  be  rather  designated  as  symbolical  at/ribtitcx,  and  not  erected  into 
independent  symbols.  E.  R.  Craven,  the  Ameiican  editor  of  Lange  on  the  Revela- 
tion (pp.  145,  146),  adopts  the  first  four  classes  of  Lord  and  Winthrop,  and  then  pro- 
pounds a  further  classification  based  upon  the  relations  of  symbols  to  the  ultimate 
objects  symbolized.  He  finds  five  orders,  which  he  designates  (1)  immediate-similar, 
(2)  immediate-ideal,  (3)  mediate-individual,  (4)  classical,  and  (5)  aberrant.  But  he 
falls  into  the  error  of  Lord  and  Winthrop,  of  making  an  object  symbolize  itself. 
His  immediate-similar,  and  at  least  some  of  his  immediate-symbols,  cannot,  for  this 
reason,  be  accepted  as  symbols  until  proven  to  be  such  by  valid  evidence.  Such  proof 
we  do  not  find  that  he  has  attempted  to  produce. 

^  Ileb.  Lex.,  sub  verbo.  Pliny  (Hist.  Nat.,  xvi,  25)  observes  that  the  almond  blos- 
soms first  of  all  trees  in  the  month  of  Januaiy,  ajid  mat\ires  its  fruit  in  March. 
Nagelsi)a{^h  (Com.  on  Jeremiah,  in  loco)  remarks:  "  What  the  cock  is  among  domestic 
animals,  the  almond  is  among  trees."  , 


BIBLICAL    HEPwMENEUTICS.  349 

A  seething  pot  (n'lSJ  ~i"'p,  a  j^ot  hlotcn  iq^on,  i.  e.,  by  fire)  appeared 
to  the  prophet  Avith  "  its  face  from  the  face  of  the  north  "  Tbe  seething 
(Jer.  i,  13),  that  is,  its  front  and  opening  were  turned  ^°*- 
toward  the  prophet  at  Jerusalem,  as  if  a  furious  fire  were  jDouring 
its  blaze  upon  its  northern  side,  and  was  likely  to  overturn  it  and 
drive  its  boiling  hot  waters  southward  "  upon  all  the  cities  of  Ju- 
dah"  (ver.  15).  This  is  explained  in  the  immediate  context  as  the 
irruption  of  "  all  the  families  of  the  kingdoms  of  the  north  "  ujjon 
the  inhabitants  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem.  "  The  swellinof  waters  of  a 
flood  are  the  usual  symbol  of  any  overwhelming  calamity  (Psa.  Ixix, 
1,  2),  and  especially  of  a  hostile  invasion  (Isa.  viii,  7,  8);  but  this  is 
a  flood  of  scalding  waters  whose  very  touch  is  death."  '  Here,  also, 
in  the  inspired  exposition  of  the  dsion,  appears  a  play  upon  He- 
brew words.  Jehovah  says,  in  verse  14,  "  From  the  north  shall  be 
opened  (nnsn)  the  evil  upon  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  land."  There 
is  a  designed  assonance  between  ffiSJ  in  verse  13  and  nnSJjl  in  verse  14. 

The  symbol  of  the  good  and  bad  figs,  in  Jer.  xxiv,  is  accom- 
panied by  an  ample  exposition.  The  prophet  saw  "  two  The  good  and 
baskets  of  figs  set  before  the  temple  of  Jehovah  "  (ver.  1),  ^^'^  ^^ss. 
as  if  they  had  been  placed  there  as  offerings  to  the  Lord.  The 
good  figs  were  pronounced  very  good,  and  the  bad  figs  were  very 
bad,  and,  for  that  reason,  not  fit  to  be  eaten  (ver.  3).  The  good 
figs  represent,  according  to  tlie  Lord's  own  showing,  the  better 
classes  of  the  Jewish  peoj^le,  who  were  to  be  taken  for  a  godly  dis- 
cipline to  the  land  of  the  Chaldseans,  and  in  due  time  brought 
back  again.  The  bad  figs  represent  Zedekiah  and  the  miserable 
remnant  that  were  left  with  him  in  the  land  of  Judah,  but  were 
soon  cut  off  or  driven  away. 

Very  similar  is  Amos'  vision  of  "  a  basket  of  summer  fruit '" 
(Amos  viii,  1),  that  is,  early-ripe  fruit  (f^i^;  comp.  2  Sam.  ^jje  summer 
xvi,  1,  and  Isa.  xvi,  9)  ready  to  be  gathered.  It  was  a  ^""^• 
symbol  of  the  end  (|*ip)  about  to  come  upon  Israel.  As  in  the  sym- 
bols of  the  almond  rod  and  the  seething  pot,  there  is  here  also  a 
paronomasia  of  the  Hebrew  words  for  r2/»e  fruit  and  end,  quayts 
and  qets.  The  people  are  rii^e  for  judgment,  and  Jehovah  will 
bring  the  matter  to  an  early  end ;  and,  as  if  the  end  had  come,  it  is 
written  (ver.  3):  "And  the  songs  of  the  temple  have  wailed  in  that 
day,  saitli  the  Lord  Jehovah.  Vast  the  corpse !  In  every  place  he 
has  cast  it  forth.     Hush !  " 

The  resurrection  of  dry  bones,  in  Ezek.  xxxvii,  1-14,  is  explained 
of  the  restoration  of  Israel  to  their  own  land.    The  vision  is  not  a  par- 
able (Jerome),  but  a  composite  visional  symbol  of  life  from  the  dead, 
'  R.  Payne  Smith,  in  Speaker's  Commentary,  in  loco. 


35.)  PRINCIPLES   OF 

The  dry  bones  are  expressly  declared  to  be  "  the  whole  house  of  Is- 
rael" (ver.  1 1),  and  are  represented  as  saying:  "  Our  bones  are  dried, 
and  our  hope  :s  perished."     These  bones  were  not  en- 

Th6  RgsuttgC" 

tion  of  dry  cased  in  sepulchres,  or  buried  in  tlie  ground,  but  were 
Bones.  g^gjj  jjj  gj.g<jt  numbers  "  on  the  surface  of  the  valley  " 

(ver.  2).  So  the  exiled  Israelites  were  scattered  among  the  nations, 
and  the  lands  of  their  exile  were  their  gi-aves.  But  the  prophecy 
now  comes  from  Jehovah  (ver.  12) :  "  Behold,  I  open  your  graves  and 
brino-  you  up  out  of  your  graves,  O  my  people! "  In  verse  14  it  is 
added :  "  I  will  put  my  Spirit  in  you,  and  ye  shall  live,  and  I  will 
cause  you  to  rest  on  your  own  ground,  and  ye  shall  know  that  I, 
Jehovah,  have  spoken  and  accomplished,  saith  Jehovah."  To  all 
outward  appearances  Israel  was  politically  and  spiritually  ruined, 
and  the  promised  restoration  was,  in  reality,  as  life  from  the  dead. 

In  the  opening  vision  of  the  Apocalypse,  John  saw  the  likeness 
The  golden  of  the  Son  of  man  in  the  midst  of  seven  golden  candle- 
candiestick.  sticks,  and  was  told  that  the  candlesticks  were  symbols 
of  the  seven  churches  of  Asia.  And  there  is  no  question  but  that 
the  golden  candlestick  with  its  seven  lamps  seen  by  the  prophet 
Zechariah  (chap,  iv,  2),  and  the  seven-branched  candlestick  of  the 
Mosaic  tabernacle  (Exod.  xxv,  31-40),  were  of  like  symbolical  im- 
port. These  all  denote  the  Church  or  people  of  God  considered 
as  the  light  of  the  world  (comp.  Matt,  v,  14;  Phil,  ii,  15;  Eph.  v,  8). 

In  Zechariah's  vision  (Zech.  iv)  there  appeared  two  olive  trees, 
The  two  Olive  one  at  the  right  and  the  other  at  the  left  of  the  golden 
Trees.  candlestick,   and  through   two  of  their  branches  they 

poured  the  golden  oil  out  of  themselves.  The  composite  symbol 
was  "  a  Avord  of  Jehovah  to  Zerubbabel,  saying.  Not  in  might  and 
not  in  power,  but  in  my  Spirit,  saith  Jehovah  of  hosts"  (ver.  6); 
and  the  two  olive  trees  denoted  "  the  two  anointed  ones  (Hebrew, 
sons  of  oil)  who  stand  by  the  Lord  of  all  the  land  "  (ver.  14).  These 
two  anointed  ones  are  spoken  of  as  if  well  known,  and  needing  no 
further  designation.  The  vision  had  special  comfort  and  encour- 
agement for  Zerubbabel.  At  that  time  of  trouble,  when  the  suprem- 
acy of  Persia  seemed  so  absolute  that  Israel  might  well  despair  of 
regaining  any  of  its  ancient  glory,  and  might  be  overawed  by  an 
undue  estimate  of  national  and  military  power,  the  lesson  is  given 
that  the  people  of  God  need  not  aspire  after  that  sort  of  prow- 
ess. God's  people  are  set  to  be  the  light  of  the  world,  and  their 
glory  is  to  be  seen  not  in  worldly  might  and  pomp,  but  in  the 
Spirit  of  Jehovah  of  hosts.  And  tliis  Spirit,  as  contrasted  with 
the  might  of  the  world,  is  to  be  understood,  not  solely  as  the  sanc- 
tifviii£r  orrace  of  God  in  the  heart,  but  as  the  divine  wisdom  and 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  351 

power  of  the  Almighty,  by  which  he  ever  carries  to  completion  the 
great  purposes  of  his  will.  The  mountains  of  difficulty  which  con- 
fronted this  great  leader  of  God's  people  should  become  a  plain 
(ver.  7);  his  hands  had  laid  the  foundation  of  the  house  of  God 
(which  itself  was  a  symbol  of  the  Church),  and  he  has  the  assurance 
that  he  shall  complete  it,  and  in  the  triumph  of  his  labour  even  the 
eyes  of  Jehovah  shall  rejoice  (ver.  10).  "Joshua,  the  high  priest 
standing  before  the  angel  of  Jehovah  "  (chap,  iii,  1)  has  already 
received  special  comfort  and  encouragement  from  the  vision  and 
prophecy  of  the  previous  chapter,  and  these  two,  Joshua  and  Zer- 
ubbabel,  are  evidently  "  the  two  anointed  ones "  denoted  by  the 
olive  trees.  These  were  raised  up  in  the  providence  of  God  and 
prepared  and  consecrated  to  be  the  ministers  of  his  grace  to  the 
people  in  that  perilous  time.'  There  is  no  pi'oj^riety  in  making 
these  trees  represent,  as  some  do,  the  Church  and  the  State;  for, 
if  the  candlestick  represents  the  Chui'ch,  it  would  be  incongruous 
to  make  one  of  the  olive  trees  represent  the  same  thing.  For  the 
same  reason  we  must  reject  the  view  of  Kliefoth  and  Wright,  who 
make  the  olive  trees  denote  Jews  and  Gentiles  as  jointly  aiding  and 
sustaining  the  lig]\t  of  truth,  for  this  also  confounds  candlestick  and 
olive  trees.  There  is,  further,  no  warrant  for  making  these  trees 
symbolize  the  regal  and  priestly  offices  or  orders,  for  the  Scripture 
furnishes  no  valid  evidence  that  those  offices  and  orders  as  such 
were  ever  designed  to  be  media  of  communicating  the  grace  and 
power  of  God  to  the  Church.  The  office  of  priest  was  established, 
not  as  a  means  of  communicating  divine  grace  to  the  people, 
but  rather  to  offer  the  people's  gifts  and  sacrifices  for  sins  to 
God  (Heb.  v,  1),  and  the  office  of  king  certainly  had  no  such  func- 
tion as  that  of  these  olive  trees.  Neither  was  Zerubbabel  in  any 
proper  sense  a  king.  Individual  priests  and  kings  were,  indeed, 
a  means  of  blessing  to  Israel,  but  an  equal  or  greater  number 
were  a  curse  rather  than  a  blessing.  Joshua  and  Zerubbabel  were 
the  chosen  and  anointed  agents  for  building  the  second  temple,  and 
they  fully  meet  the  requirements  of  the  symbol.* 

'  "The  two  sons  of  oil,"  says  Keil,  "can  only  be  the  two  media,  anointed  with  oil, 
tlirough  whom  the  spiritual  and  gracious  gifts  of  God  were  conveyed  to  the  Church 
of  the  Lord,  namely,  the  existing  representatives  of  the  priesthood  and  the  regal  gov- 
ernment, who  were  at  that  time  Joshua,  the  high  priest,  and  the  prince  Zerubbabel. 
These  stand  by  the  Lord  of  the  whole  earth  as  the  divinely  appointed  instruments 
through  whom  the  Lord  causes  his  Spirit  to  flow  into  his  congregation." — Commen- 
tary on  the  Minor  Prophets,  in  loco. 

^  Cowles  observes:  "I  prefer  to  apply  the  phrase,  the  two  anointed  ones,  to  the  two 
orders,  kings  and  priests,  rather  than  to  the  two  individuals  then  filling  those  offices, 
Zerubbabel  and  Joshua,  because  this  provision  for  oil  through  these  conducting  tubes 


353  PRINCIPLES   OF 

The  mention  of  "  the  two  olive  trees  and  the  two  candlesticks, 
The  allusion  in  f^tanding  before  the  Lord  of  the  earth,"  in  Kev.  xi,  4,  is 
Rev.  xi,  4.  merely  a  metaphorical  allusion  to  these  symbols  in 
Zechariah,  and  serves  to  enhance  the  dignity  of  the  two  witnesses 
whom  tlie  Avriter  is  describing.  But  with  John  they  are  not  sym- 
bols, and  were  not  seen  as  such  in  his  vision.  And  this  fact  should 
make  us  distrust  all  those  expositions  which  make  the  two  Avitnesses 
represent  offices  and  orders  in  the  Church,  or  two  lines  of  witnesses, 
or  the  Law  and  the  Gospel,  or  two  diiferent  Christian  bodies,  as 
the  Waldenses  and  Albigenses.  If  the  olive  trees  in  Zechariah  rep- 
resent individuals,  the  allusion  in  Rev.  xi,  4  would  most  properly 
designate  the  two  witnesses  as  individuals  also,  and  the  Avhole  de- 
scription of  their  work,  power,  death,  resurrection,  and  ascension  to 
heaven,  most  readily  harmonizes  with  this  view.  The  singularity  of 
their  position  is  also  denoted  by  calling  them  "  the  two  candlesticks," 
as  well  as  the  two  olive  trees.  They  were  not  only  God's  two 
anointed  ones,  but  the  two  sole  light  holders  which  he  had  remain- 
ing in  that  doomed  city  "where  their  Lord  was  crucified"  (ver.  8). 

The  symbols  employed  in  the  Book  of  Daniel  are,  happily,  so 
fully  exjjlained  that  there  need  be  no  serious  doubt  as  to  the  import 
^,  •  .,     of  most  of  them.    The  great  image  of  Nebuchadnezzar's 

The  composite  .. 

Image  of  Dan-  dream  (chap  ii,  31-35)  Avas  a  symbol  of  a  succession  of 
*^^""  world-powers.     The  head  of  gold  denoted  Nebuchad- 

nezzar himself,  as  the  mighty  head  and  representative  of  the  Baby- 
lonian monarchy  (vers.  37,  38).  The  other  parts  of  the  image, 
composed  of  other  metals,  symbolized  kingdoms  that  were  subse- 
quently to  arise.  The  legs  of  iron  denoted  a  fourth  kingdom  of 
great  strength,  "  forasmuch  as  iron  breaks  in  pieces  and  crushes 
every  thing"  (ver.  40).  The  feet  and  toes,  part  of  iron  and  part  of 
clay,  indicated  the  mingled  strength  and  weakness  of  this  kingdom 
in  its  later  period  (vers.  41-43).  The  stone  that  smote  the  image, 
and  became  :i  great  mountain  filling  the  whole  land,  was  a  prophetic 
symbol  of  the  kingdom  of  the  God  of  heaven  (vers.  44,  45).' 

was  not  transient,  limited  to  the  lifetime  of  these  two  men,  but  permanent — to  con- 
tinue as  long  as  God  should  give  them  kings  and  priests,  and,  especially,  because 
permanence  was  a  cardinal  idea  in  the  symbol." — Notes  on  the  Minor  Prophets,  in 
loco.  Here  are  several  umvarranled  and  fallacious  assumptions.  There  is  nothing 
in  the  symbol  that  represents  enduring  permanence ;  Zerubbabel,  though  of  royal  an- 
cestry, was  not  a  king,  but,  like  Noliciniah,  of  later  times,  was  merely  a  temporary 
governor,  and  a  subject  of  the  Persian  Empire.  And  no  king,  in  any  worthy  sense 
of  the  name,  ever  reigned  in  Israel  after  the  exile. 

'  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream  of  the  great  tree,  in  Dan.  iv,  is  so  fully  and  minutely  ex- 
])lained  there,  that  we  need  only  make  this  reference  to  it,  and  leave  the  reader  to  ex- 
jiniine  tlie  details  for  himself. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  353 

Tlie  four  great  beasts,  in  Dan.  vii,  1-8,  are  said  to  represent  four 
kings  that  should  arise  out  of  the  earth  (ver.  11).  The  xhefourBeasts 
fourth  beast  is  also  defined,  in  verse  23,  as  a  fourth  of  Daniel  vii. 
kingdom,  from  which  we  infer  that  a  wild  beast  may  symbolize 
either  a  king  or  a  kingdom.  So  in  the  image,  the  king  Nebuchad- 
nezzar was  the  head  of  gold  (chap,  li,  38),  and  also  the  representa- 
tive of  his  kingdom.  The  ten  horns  of  the  fourth  beast  are  ten 
kings  (ver.  24),  but  from  a  comparison  of  Dan.  viii,  8,  22,  and  Rev. 
xvii,  11,  12,  it  appears  that  horns  may  also  symbolize  either  kings  or 
kingdoms.  In  any  such  image  of  a  wild  beast  with  horns,  the 
beast  would  properly  represent  the  kingdom  or  world-power,  and 
the  horn  or  horns  some  particular  king  or  kings  in  whom  the  exer- 
cise of  the  power  of  the  kingdom  centered  itself.  So  a  horn  may 
represent  either  a  king  or  kingdom,  but  always  with  this  implied 
distinction.  No  explanation  is  given  of  the  wings  and  the  heads  of 
the  beasts,  nor  of  other  noticeable  features  of  the  vision,  but  Ave 
can  hardly  doubt  that  they  also  had  some  symbolical  import.  The 
vision  of  the  ram  and  the  he-goat,  in  chap,  viii,  contains  no  symbols 
essentially  different,  for  the  ram  is  explained  as  the  kings  of  Media 
and  Persia,  the  goat  as  the  king  of  Greece,  and  the  great  horn  as 
the  first  king  (vers.  20,  21). 

Most  of  the  symbols  employed  hj  Zechariah  are  accompanied  by 
a  partial  explanation,  but  so  vague  and  general  as  to  symbols  in 
leave  much  room  for  conjecture.  The  riders  on  various  zechanah. 
coloured  horses,  indefinite  in  number,  are  said  to  be  "those  whom 
Jehovah  sent  forth  to  walk  up  and  down  in  the  land"  (Zech.  i,  10), 
and  they  are  represented  as  saying  to  the  angel  of  Jehovah :  "  We 
have  Avalked  up  and  down  in  the  land,  and  behold,  all  the  land  is 
sitting  and  resting"  (ver.  11).  Whether  they  traversed  the  land 
together  in  a  body,  or  separately  and  successively;  and  whether 
their  mission  was  merely  one  of  inspection,  or  for  the  jDurpose  of 
bringing  the  land  to  the  quiet  condition  reported,  are  points  left 
undecided  by  the  language  of  the  sacred  writer.  Any  one  of  these 
suppositions  is  possible;  and  our  opinion  on  the  subject  should  bo 
formed  by  a  careful  study  of  the  historical  standpoint  of  the  pi-oph- 
et,  and  the  analogy  of  other  similar  visions  and  symbols. 

The  four  horns  (Zech.  i,  18,  19  in  Eng.  Ver.,  Sept.,  and  Vulg., 
but  ehap.  ii,  1,  2  in  Heb.  text),  described  in  the  next  vis-  t^c  four  Horns 
ion  are  explained  as  "  the  horns  which  scattered  Judah,  and  four  smiths. 
Israel,  and  Jerusalem."  Horns  here,  as  in  the  visions  of  Daniel, 
doubtless  represent  kings  or  kingdoms,  but  Avhether  these  four 
horns  belonged  to  one  beast  or  more  is  not  stated.  Many  inter- 
preters understand  by  the  four  horns  the  four  kingdoms  predicted 
23 


354  PRINCIPLES   OF 

by  Daniel;  but  against  this  view  is  the  consideration  that  these 
four  horns  have  wrought  their  work  of  violence  (l"iT,  have  scattered, 
or  (lid  scatter),  but  a  part  of  the  kingdoms  foretold  by  Daniel  were 
future  from  the  historical  standpoint  of  Zechariah.  Others  under- 
stand four  distinct  world-powers,  as  Assyria,  Babylon,  Egypt,  and 
Persia,  while  others  understand  the  number  four  as  a  symbolical 
number,  having  a  very  general  reference  to  the  four  points  of  the 
compass,  and  denoting  enemies  from  all  quarters.  Either  of  the  last 
two  suppositions  may  be  held,  but  the  last  named,  in  the  absence 
of  any  thing  more  specific  in  the  language  of  the  prophet,  is  the 
safer  hypothesis.  The  four  smiths  or  "carpenters"  (vers.  20,  21), 
which  are  evidently  the  providential  agencies  raised  up  to  awe  and 
cast  out  the  powerful  enemies  and  scatterers  of  God's  people,  may 
denote  either  human  or  divine  instrumentalities,  or  an  interworking 
of  both. 

The  flying  roll  (Zech.  v,  1-4)  was  a  symbol  of  Jehovah's  curse 
The  flying  Roll  "pon  thieves  and  false  swearers.  Its  dimensions,  twenty 
andtheEphah.  cubits  by  ten,  exactly  the  size  of  the  porch  of  the  temple 
(1  Kings  vi,  3),  might  naturally  intimate  that  the  judgment  denoted 
must  begin  at  the  house  of  the  Loi'd  (Ezek.  ix,  6 ;  1  Pet.  iv,  17). 
In  immediate  connexion  with  this  vision  the  prophet  saw  also  an 
ephah  going  forth  (ver.  6),  an  uplifted  talent  of  lead,"  and  a  woman 
sitting  in  the  midst  of  the  ephah.  The  Avoman  was  declared  to  be 
a  symbol  of  "wickedness"  (ver.  8).  But  what  sort  of  wickedness? 
The  ephah  and  the  stone  of  lead,  naturally  suggestive  of  measure 
and  iceight,  would  indicate  the  wickedness  of  unrighteous  traffic — 
the  sin  denounced  by  Amos  (viii,  5)  of  "making  the  ephah  small 
and  the  shekel  great,  and  falsifying  the  balances  by  deceit."  This 
symbol  of  wickedness  is  here  presented  as  a  woman  who  had  an 
empty  measure  for  her  throne,  and  a  weight  of  lead  for  a  sign. 
But   her   punishment   and   confusion    are    brought    about   by  the 

'Very  many  expositors  understand  TTfttV  *133  to  mean  a  circle  or  cover  of  lead  ; 
but,  as  Wri{i]it  well  observes,  "if  the  epliali  had  a  cover  of  lead,  that  cover  would 
scarcely  have  been  termed  the  stove  of  lend,  or  leaden  stone  (ver.  8).  The  renderinj^ 
leaden  cover  obscures  the  real  sense  of  the  vision.  The  Hebrew  word  rendered  taloit 
docs,  indeed,  literally  mean  a  circle,  and  the  expression  a  circle  of  bread  is  used  to  do- 
note  a  round  loaf  (Exod.  xxix,  23;  1  Sam.  ii,  36).  The  word  is  not  found  in  the  sig- 
nification of  a  cover,  though  that  is  a  possible  signification.  It  is  constantly  used  in 
the  sense  of  a  fixed  weight  by  which  gold,  silver,  and  other  things  were  weighed  and 
measured,  and  is  naturally  spoken  of  in  such  a  meaning  here  in  connexion  with  the 
ephah,  as  the  latter  was  the  usual  measure  of  capacity.  The  talent  was  the  standard 
measure  of  quantity,  and  the  weight  was  made  of  lead  as  the  most  common  heavy 
metal,  and  was  used  in  all  commercial  transactions  for  weighing  out  money." — Bamp- 
ton  Lectures  on  Zechariah,  pp.  Ill,  112. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  355 

instruments  of  lier  sin  (comp.  Matt,  vii,  2),  She  is  cast  into  tlie 
ephah,  and  the  leaden  weiglit  is  cast  like  a  stone  upon  her  mouth. 
She  is  not,  however,  destroyed,  but  transported  to  a  distant  land,  and 
this  is  effected  by  two  other  women,  apparently  her  aiders  and  abet- 
tors in  wickedness,  who  had  wings  like  the  wings  of  a  stork,  and  who 
were  therefore  quick  and  powerful  enough  to  rescue  the  one  woman 
from  immediate  doom,  and  carry  her  off  and  establish  her  in  another 
land.  Thus  the  children  of  this  world  are  wise  toward  their  own 
kind  (Luke  xvi,  8).  This  distant  land  is  called  the  land  of  Shinar 
(ver.  11),  perhaps  for  the  reason  that  it  was  the  land  where  wicked- 
ness first  developed  itself  after  the  flood  (Gen.  xi,  2). 

The  four  chariots,  probably  war  chariots,  which  this  same  prophet 
saw  going  forth  from  between  the  two  mountains  of  The  four  char- 
brass,  and  drawn  by  different  coloured  horses  (Zech.  vi,  1°*^^- 
1-8),  are  but  another  and  fuller  form  of  presenting  the  facts  symbol- 
ized in  the  vision  of  the  horsemen  in  chap,  i,  8-11.  The  import  of 
the  mountains  of  brass  is  undefined.  The  chariots  and  horses  "  are 
the  four  winds '  of  the  heavens,  going  forth  from  standing  before 
the  Lord  of  all  the  land"  (ver.  5).  The  black  horses  were  said  to 
go  forth  to  the  land  of  the  north,  the  white  behind  them  (perhaps 
meaning  to  regions  behind  or  beyond  them,  DnnnK"7N*),  and  the  spec- 
kled (D'''n'i3,  spotted)  to  the  land  of  the  south.  Whither  the  red 
horses  went  is  not  stated,  unless  we  suppose  (as  is  very  probable) 
that  the  word  Q"'5f^X,  strong,  in  ver.  7,  (rendered  6ay  in  Eng.  Ver.), 
is  a  copyist's  blunder  for  I3"'1i'lX,  red.  These,  it  is  said,  "  sought  to 
go  forth  to  walk  up  and  down  in  the  land"  (ver.  7),  and  were  per- 
mitted to  have  their  way,  and  it  is  added  that  those  that  went  to 
the  land  of  the  north  "have  caused  my  spirit  to  rest  (in  judgment) 
in  the  land  of  the  north." 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  these  warlike  symbols  denoted  cer- 
tain agencies  of  divine  judgment.  They  were,  like  the  winds  of 
the  heavens,  the  messengers  and  ministers  of  the  divine  will  (comp. 
Psa.  civ,  4;  Jer.  xlix,  36),  and  it  is  to  be  noted  that  the  horsemen 
of  chap,  i,  8-11,  and  these  chariots,  respectively,  open  and  close  the 
series  of  Zechariah's  symbolic  visions.  No  more  specific  explana- 
tion of  their  meaning  than  that  furnished  above  is  given  in  the 
Scripture.  Perhaps,  in  distinguishing  the  import  of  the  several 
symbols,  we  might  reasonably  su})pose  that  the  warlike  riders  on 
horses  denoted  so  many  military  chieftains  and  conquerors  (as  for 
example  Shalmaneser,  Nebuchadnezzar,  Pharaoh  Necho,  and  Cyrus), 

*  The  worfl  nin^~l,  v'indt,  does  not  anywhere  appear  to  be  used  in  the  phiral  in  the 
sense  of  .spirits,  or  personal  beings ;  but  these  four  chariots  correspond  witii  the  mys- 
tic wheels  of  Ezek.  i,  15-21 ;    x,  9-13. 


:lt 


356  PRINCIPLES   OF 

and  the  more  impersonal  vision  of  tlie  chariots  and  horses  as  con- 
quering ■\vorld-i)owers,  and  having  regard  to  the  military  forces  of  a 
kingdom  rather  than  any  individual  conqueror;  as  when,  in  Isa.  x,  5, 
Assyria  (not  Assyrian  as  Eng.  Ver.)  is  a  rod  of  God's  anger. 

The  foregoing  examples  of  symbols,  more  or  less  fully  explained, 
should  have  great  weight  with  us  in  determining  the 

The   lorecroing  c  ■3'  o 

Examples  au-  general  principles  of  biblical  symbolism.  We  note  that 
thorize—  ^j^^  names  of  all  these  symbols  are  to  be  taken  literally. 

Trees,  figs,  bones,  candlesticks,  olive  trees,  beasts,  horns,  horses, 
riders,  and  chariots,  are  all  simple  and  natural  designations  of  what 
the  prophets  saw.  But,  while  the  words  are  to  be  understood  lit- 
erally, they  are  symbols  of  something  else.  As,  in  metonymy,  one 
thing  is  put  for  another,  or,  as  in  allegory,  one  thing  is  said  and  an- 
other is  intended,  so  a  symbol  always  denotes  something  other 
than  itself.  Ezekiel  saw  a  resurrection  of  dry  bones,  but  it  meant 
the  restoi'ation  of  Israel  from  the  lands  of  their  exile.  Daniel  saw 
a  great  horn  upon  the  head  of  a  he-goat,  but  it  represented  the 
mighty  Grecian  conqueror,  Alexander  the  Great.  But,  though  one 
thing  is  said  and  another  is  intended  in  the  use  of  symbols,  there  is 
always  traceable  a  resemblance,  more  or  less  detailed,  between  the 
symbol  and  the  thing  symbolized.  In  some  cases,  as  that  of  the 
almond  rod  (Jer.  i,  11),  the  analogy  is  suggested  by  the  name.  A 
candlestick  represents  the  Church  or  people  of  God  by  holding  a 
light  where  it  may  shine  for  all  in  the  house  (Matt,  v,  15),  even  as 
God's  people  are  to  occupy  a  position  in  the  visible  Church,  and 
let  their  light  so  shine  that  others  may  see  their  good  works.  The 
correspondences  between  the  beasts  in  Daniel  and  the  powers  they 
represented  are  in  some  points  quite  detailed.  In  view  of  these 
Thr  e  funda-  ^^^^'"^^  facts,  therefoi'e,  we  accept  the  following  as 
mental  Princi-  three  fundamental  principles  of  symbolism:  (1)  The 
^'^^'  names  of  symbols  are  to  be  understood  literally;  (2)  the 

symbols  always  denote  something  essentially  different  from  them- 
selves; and  (3)  some  resemblance,  more  or  less  minute,  is  traceable 
between  the  symbol  and  the  thing  symbolized. 

The  great  question  with  the  interpreter  of  symbols  should,  there- 
No  minute  set  fore,  be,  AVhat  are  the  probable  points  of  resemblance 
cLie'*^\o''^'^aii  between  this  sign  and  the  thing  which  it  is  intended  to 
symbols.  represent?     And  one  would  suppose  it  to  be  obvious  to 

every  thoughtful  mind  that  in  answering  this  question  no  minute 
and  rigid  set  of  rules,  as  supposably  applicable  to  all  symbols,  can 
be  expected.  For  there  is  an  air  of  enigma  and  mystery  about  all 
emblems,  and  the  examples  adduced  above  show  that  while  in  some 
the  points  of  resemblance  are  many  and  minute,  in  others  they  are 


BIBLICAL    HEUMElN'EUTiCS.  357 

slight  and  incidental.  In  general  it  may  be  said  that  in  answering 
the  above  question  the  interpreter  must  have  strict  regard  (1)  to 
the  historical  standpoint  of  the  writer  or  prophet,  (2)  to  the  scope 
and  context,  and  (3)  to  the  analogy  and  import  of  similar  symbols 
and  figures  elsewhere  used.  That  is,  doubtless,  the  true  interpreta- 
tion of  every  symbol  which  most  fully  satisfies  these  several  condi- 
tions, and  which  attempts  to  press  no  point  of  supposable  resem- 
blance beyond  what  is  clearly  warranted  by  fact,  reason,  and 
analogy. 

For  the  interpretation  of  prophetic  symbols  Fairbairn  enunciates 
two  very  important  principles:   (l)"The  image  must  . 

be  contemplated  in  its  broader  and  commoner  aspects,  statement  of 
as  it  would  naturally  present  itself  to  the  view  of  per-  p^^^^'p^^^- 
sons  generally  acquainted  with  the  works  and  ways  of  God,  not  as 
connected  with  any  smaller  incidents  or  recondite  uses  known  only 
to  the  few.  ...  (2)  The  other  condition  with  which  the  use  and 
interpretation  of  symbols  must  be  associated  is  that  of  a  consistent 
and  uniform  manner  of  applying  them;  not  shifting  from  the  sym- 
bolical to  the  literal  without  any  apparent  indication  of  a  change 
in  the  original;  or  from  one  aspect  of  the  symbolical  to  another 
essentially  difi^erent,  but  adhering  to  a  regular  and  harmonious 
treatment  of  the  objects  introduced  into  the  representation.  With- 
out such  a  consistence  and  regularity  in  the  employment  of  symbols 
there  could  be  no  certainty  in  the  interpretations  put  upon  them, 
all  would  become  arbitrary  and  doubtful."  ^ 

The  hermeneutical  principles  derived  from  the  foregoing  exami- 
nation of  the  visional  symbols  of  Scripture  are  equally  same  Princi- 
applicable  to  the  interpretation  of  material  symbols,  MaterSf  sym^ 
such  as  the  tabernacle,  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  the  bois. 
mercy-seat,  the  sacrificial  offerings  and  ceremonial  washings  re- 
quired by  the  law,  the  water  of  baptism  and  the  bread  and  wine  in 
the  Lord's  supper.  For,  as  far  as  they  set  forth  any  spiritual  fact  or 
thought,  their  imagery  is  of  essentially  the  same  general  character." 

'  Fairbairn  on  Prophecy,  pp.  150,  151.  The  writer  goes  on  to  show  how  current 
systems  of  apocalyptic  interpretation  violate  both  of  these  principles. 

^  Biihr  enunciates  the  following  hermeneutical  principles  and  rules  for  the  explan- 
ation of  symbols :  (1)  The  meaning  of  a  symbol  is  to  be  determined  first  of  all  by  an 
accurate  knowledge  of  its  nature.  (2)  The  symbols  of  the  Mosaic  cultus  can  have,  in 
general,  only  such  meaning  as  accords  with  the  religious  ideas  and  truths  of  Mosaism, 
and  with  its  clearly  expressed  and  acknowledged  principles.  (3)  The  import  of  each 
separate  symbol  is  to  be  sought,  in  the  first  place,  from  its  name.  (4)  Each  individual 
symbol  has,  in  general,  but  one  signification.  (5)  However  different  the  connexion  in 
which  it  may  occur,  each  individual  symbol  has  always  the  same  fundamental  mean- 
ing.  (6)  In  every  symbol,  whether  it  be  object  or  action,  the  main  idea  to  be  symbol- 


358  PRINCIPLES   OF 

The  symbolical  import  of  the  shedding  of  blood  in  sacrificial 
sjoiboiisin  of  worship  is  shown  in  Lev.  xvii,  11,  where  it  is  stated, 
Diood.  as  the  reason  for  the  prohibition  of  eating  blood,  that 

" the  soul  of  the  flesh  is  in  the  blood,  and  I  have  gi\en  it  to  you 
upon  the  altar  to  make  expiation  for  your  souls,  for  the  blood  makes 
expiation  in  the  soul."  The  exact  sense  of  the  last  clause  is  some- 
what obscure.  The  phrase  t^S33,  in  tJie  soul,  is  rendered  in  the 
common  version,  after  the  Septuagint,  Vulgate,  and  Luther,  for 
the  soul ;  but  the  verb  133  is  never  elsewhere  construed  with  3,  re- 
ferring to  that  for  lohich  expiation  is  made.  It  is  better,  there- 
fore, to  translate  as  Keil  does:  "For  the  blood,  it  expiates  by  virtue 
of  the  soul."  The  preposition  3  thus  denotes  the  means  by  which 
the  atonement  is  accomplished.  "  It  was  not  the  blood  as  such," 
says  Keil,  "but  the  blood  as  the  vehicle  of  the  soul,  which  pos- 
sessed expiatory  virtue,  because  the  animal  soul  was  offered  to  God 
upon  the  altar  as  a  substitute  for  the  human  soul."  ^  Delitzsch  ren- 
ders: "For  the  blood,  by  means  of  the  soul,  is  an  atonement." 
That  is,  as  he  observes,  "  the  blood  atones  by  the  means,  or  by  the 
power,  of  the  soul  which  is  in  it.  The  life  of  the  sinner  has  spe- 
cially incurred  the  punitive  wrath  of  Jehovah,  but  he  accepts  for  it 
the  substituted  life  of  the  sacrificial  beast,  the  blood  of  which  is 
shed  and  brought  before  him,  whereupon  he  pardons  the  sinner. 
The  prohibition  of  eating  the  blood  is  thus  doiibly  established:  the 
blood  has  the  soul  in  itself,  and  it  is,  in  consequence  of  a  gracious 
arrangement  of  God,  the  means  of  atonement  for  the  souls  of  men, 
in  virtue  of  the  soul  contained  in  it.  The  one  reason  lies  in  the 
nature  of  the  blood,  and  the  other  in  its  destination  to  a  holy  pur- 
pose, which,  even  apairt  from  the  other  reason,  withdraws  it  from  a 
common  use:  it  is  that  which,  contains  the  soul,  and  God  suffers  it 
to  be  brought  to  his  altar  as  an  atonement  for  human  souls.  It 
atones  not  by  indwelling  power,  which  the  blood  of  beasts  has  not, 
except,  perchance,  as  given  by  God  for  this  purpose — given,  name- 
ly, with  a  view  to  the  fulness  of  the  times  foreseen  from  eternity, 
when  that  blood  is  to  flow  for  humanity  which  atones,  because  a 
soul  united  to  the  eternal  Spirit  (comp.  Ileb.  ix,  14)  has  place  there- 
•:i,  and  because  it  is  exactly  of  such  value  that  it  is  able  to  screen 
tlie  whole  of  humanity."  '^ 

Nothing  pertaining  to  the  Mosaic  worship  is  more  evident  than 

ized  must  be  carefully  distincuishcil  from  that  which  nocesparily  serves  only  for  its 
a[)pr()priate  exhibition,  and  has,  therefore,  only  a  secondary  purpose.  See  his  Sym- 
bolik  des  moeaischen  Cultus,  pp.  89-93.     Second  ed.     Heidelberg,  1874. 

'  Commentary  on  Leviticus  xvil,  11. 

*  Biblical  Psycholofry,  p.  283.    See  the  whole  section  on  soul  and  blood,  part  iv,  sec.  1 1. 


BIBLICAL   HERiMENEUTICS.  3o9 

the  fact  that  "  apai't  from  shedding  of  blood  (alfiareKXvoia,  pourmg 
out  of  blood,  Heb.  ix,  22)  there  is  no  remission."  This  ^  ^  .^ .  ^ 
solemn  pouring  out  of  blood  was  the  offering  of  a  without  Wood- 
living  soul,  for  the  warm  life  blood  was  conceived  as  ^  ^  ^°^' 
the  element  in  which  the  soul  subsisted,  or  with  which  it  Was  in 
some  mysterious  way  identified  (comp.  Deut.  xii,  23).  When  poured 
out  at  the  altar  it  symbolized  the  surrender  of  a  life  which  had 
been  forfeited  by  sin,  and  the  worshipper  who  made  the  sacrifice 
thereby  acknowledged  before  God  his  death-deserving  guilt.  "  The 
rite  of  expiatory  sacrifice,"  says  Fairbairn,  "was,  in  its  own  nature, 
a  symbolical  transaction  embodying  a  threefold  idea;  first,  that  the 
worshijiper,  having  been  guilty  of  sin,  had  forfeited  his  life  to  God; 
then,  that  the  life  so  forfeited  must  be  surrendered  to  divine  justice; 
and,  finally,  that  being  surrendered  in  the  way  appointed,  it  was 
given  back  to  him  again  by  God,  or  he  became  re-established  as  a 
justified  person  in  the  divine  favour  and  fellowship."  ' 

The  symbolism  and  t}']^)ology  of  the  Mosaic  tabernacle  are  recog- 
nized in  the  ninth  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  He-  symbolism  of 
brews,  from  which  it  appears  that  specific  objects,  as  the  Tabernacle. 
the  candlestick,  the  showbread,  and  the  ark,  had  a  symbolical 
meaning,  and  that  the  various  ordinances  of  the  worship  were  shad- 
ows of  good  things  to  come.  But  the  particular  import  of  the 
various  symbols,  and  of  the  tabernacle  as  a  whole,  is  left  for  the 
interpreter  to  gather  from  the  various  Scripture  passages  which 
bear  upon  the  subject.  It  must  be  ascertained,  like  the  import  of 
all  other  symbols  not  formally  expounded  in  the  Scriptures,  from 
the  particular  names  or  designations  used,  and  from  such  allusions 
by  the  sacred  writers  as  will  serve  either  for  suggestion  or  illus- 
tration. 

The  words  by  which  the  tabernacle  is  designated  serve  as  a  clue 
to  the  great  idea  embodied  in  its  complex  symbolism.  Names  of  the 
The  principal  name  is  |3K>0,  dwellinff,  but  ^HK,  tent,  usu-  Tabernacle. 
ally  connected  with  some  distinguishing  epithet,  is  also  frequently 
used,  and  is  applied  to  the  tabernacle  in  the  books  of  Exodus,  Le- 
viticus, and  Numbers  more  than  one  hundred  and  fifty  times.  In 
Exod.  xxiii,  19;  xxxiv,  26,  it  is  called  niiT  n'3,  /louse  of  Jehovah, 
and  in  1  Sam.  i,  9 ;  iii,  3,  nin^  ^^'i!},-  temple  of  Jehovah.  But  a  fuller 
indication  of  the  import  of  these  names  is  found  in  the  compound 

>  Tj'pology,  vol.  i,  p.  54.  On  the  symbolism  and  typology  of  the  Old  Testament 
sacrifices,  see  Kurtz,  Der  alttestamentliche  Opfercultus  (Mitau,  1862);  English  trans- 
lation, Sacrificial  Worship  of  the  Old  Testament  (Edinb.,  1863) ;  Cave,  The  Scriptural 
Doctrine  of  Sacrifice  (Edinb.,  1877);  Kcil,  Die  Opfer  des  alten  Bundes  nach  ihrer 
symbolischen  und  typischen  Bedeuting  (in  Luth.  Zeitschrift  for  1856  and  1857). 


860  PRINCIPLES   OF 

expressions  lyiJD  piiN,  tent  of  meeting,  nnj;n  pn'x,  tent  of  the  testi- 
tnojiy,  and  rinyn  I3'w^•p,  dxceUing  of  the  testimony.  The  testimony  is 
a  term  applied  emphatically  to  the  law  of  the  two  tables  (Exod. 
XXV,  16,  21 ;  xxxi,  18),  and  designated  the  authoritative  declaration 
of  God,  upon  the  basis  of  which  he  made  a  covenant  with  Israel 
(Exod.  xxxiv,  27;  Deut.  iv,  13).  Hence  these  tables  were  called 
tables  of  the  covenant  (Deut.  ix,  9)  as  well  as  tables  of  the  testi- 
mony. As  the  representatives  of  God's  most  holy  testimony  against 
sin  they  occupied  the  most  secret  and  sacred  place  of  his  tabernacle 
(Exod.  XXV,  16).  All  these  designations  of  the  tabernacle  serve  to 
indicate  its  great  design  as  a  symbol  of  Jehovah's  meeting  and 
dwelling  with  his  people.  One  passage  which,  above  all  others, 
elaborates  this  thought,  is  Exod.  xxix,  42-46 :  "  It  shall  be  a  con- 
tinual burnt  offering  throughout  your  generations,  at  the  door  of 
the  tent  of  meeting  ("iyto'pnx)  before  Jehovah,  where  I  Avill  meet 
(1J?JI«?)  you,  to  speak  unto  thee  there.  And  I  will  meet  (^nip)  there 
the  sons  of  Israel,  and  he  (i.  q.,  Israel)  shall  be  sanctified  in  my 
glory.  And  I  will  sanctify  the  tent  of  meeting  (nyiO'prix)  and  the 
altar,  and  Aaron  and  his  sons  will  I  sanctify  to  act  as  priests  for 
me.  And  I  will  dwell  (''033"')  in  the  midst  of  the  sons  of  Israel,  and 
I  will  be  God  to  them,  and  they  shall  know  that  I  am  Jehovah  their 
God,  who  brought  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  that  I  might 
dwell  C?3p'!')  in  their  midst— I,  Jehovah,  their  God." 

The  tabernacle,  therefore,  is  not  to  be  thought  of  as  a  symbol  of 
things  external  and  visible,'  not  even  of  heaven  itself  considered 
merely  as  a  /)^rtce,  but  of  the  meeting  and  dwelling  together  of  God 
and  his  people  both  in  time  and  eternity.  The  ordinances  of 
Tabernacle  worship  may  be  expected  to  denote  the  way  in  which 
symbolizes   a  Jchovah  condescends  to  meet  with  man,  and  enables 

divine-human  i       •    i  x      i  •  ^-  i  r   ii 

Relation  rather  Hian  to  approach  nigh  unto  lum — a  meeting  and  icilow- 
than  a  place,  gjjjp  j^y  which  the  true  Israel  become  sanctified  in  the 
divine  glory  (Exod.  xxix,  43).  The  divine-human  relationship  real- 
ized in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  attained  in  Christ  when  God  comes 

'  A  full  statement  of  the  various  opinions  of  the  symbolical  import  of  the  tabernacle 
would  require  more  space  than  this  work  allow.*,  and  would  tend,  perhaps,  only  to 
confuse.  Our  purpose  is  to  direct  the  student  to  the  right  method  of  ascertaining  the 
meaning  of  the  principal  symbols,  and  leave  him  to  pursue  the  details  for  himself. 
For  a  condensed  statement  of  opinions  on  the  subject,  see  especially  Leyrer,  article 
Htiftshiitte,  in  Herzog's  Real-Encyclopadie  (Stuttgardt  ed.,  1855-GC).  See  also 
Biihr,  Symbolik  des  mosaischen  Cultus  (Hcidclb.,  2  vols.,  18.S7-89;  revised  ed.,  vol.  i, 
18*74);  Btihr,  Der  salomonische  Temple  (Karlsr.,  1818);  Friedrich,  Symbolik  der  mo- 
Baischen  Stiftshiitte  (Lpz.,  1841);  Simpson,  Typical  Character  of  the  Tabernacle 
(Edinb.,  18r,2);  Koil,  Biblischcn  Archaeologie,  pp.  124-129  (Frankf.,  1875);  Atwator, 
History  and  Significance  of  the  Sacred  Tabernacle  of  the  Hebrews  (New  York,  1875). 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  361 

unto  man  and  makes  his  abode  (ixovtjv)  with  him  (John  xiv,  23),  so 
that  the  man  dwells  in  God  and  God  in  him  (1  John  iv,  16).  This 
is  the  glorious  indwelling  contemplated  in  the  prayer  of  Jesus  that 
all  believers  "  may  be  one,  as  thou,  Father,  art  in  me,  and  I  in  thee, 
that  they  also  may  be  in  us,  that  the  world  may  believe  that  thou 
didst  send  me.  And  the  glory  which  thou  hast  given  me  I  have 
given  them,  that  they  may  be  one,  even  as  we  are  one,  I  in 
them  and  thou  in  me,  that  they  may  be  perfected  into  one  "  (John 
xvii,  21-23).  Of  this  blessed  relationship  the  tabernacle  is  a  signifi- 
cant symbol,  and  being  also  a  shadow  of  the  good  things  to  come, 
it  was  a  type  of  the  New  Testament  Church  or  kingdom  of  God, 
that  spiritual  house,  built  of  living  stones  (1  Pet.  ii,  5)  which  is  a 
habitation  of  God  in  the  spirit  (Eph.  ii,  22). 

The  two  apartments  of  the  ||t*'P  {choelUng,  or  tabernacle  proper), 
the  holy  place  and  the  most  holy,  would  naturally  rep-  ThetwoApart- 
resent  the  twofold  relation,  the  human  and  the  divine,  ments. 
The  Holy  of  Holies,  being  Jehovah's  special  dwellingplace,  would 
appropriately  contain  the  symbols  of  his  testimony  and  relation  to 
his  people ;  the  holy  place,  with  ministering  priest,  incense  altar, 
table  of  showbread  and  candlestick,  expressed  the  relation  of  the 
true  worshippers  toward  God.  The  two  places,  separated  only  by 
the  veil,  denoted,  therefore,  on  the  one  hand,  what  God  is  in  his 
condescending  grace  toward  his  people,  and  on  the  other,  what  his 
redeemed  [)eople — the  salt  of  the  earth  and  the  light  of  the  world — 
are  toward  him.  It  was  meet  that  the  divine  and  human  should 
thus  be  made  distinct.^ 

As  the  Holy  of  Holies  in  the  temple  was  a  perfect  cube  (1  Kings 
vi,  20),   so   was  it  doubtless    in  the  tabernacle.     The   ^he  Most  Holy 
length  and  breadth  and  height  of  it  being  equal,  like   piac«  and  its 
the  heavcnlj^  Jerusalem  (Rev.  xxi,  16),  its  form  was  a  '^"^  ° 
symbol  of  perfection.     Here  was  placed  the  ark,  the  depository  of 

'  However  near  God  may  come  to  his  creatures,  and  however  close  the  fellowship  to 
which  he  admits  them,  there  still  must  be  something  to  mark  his  incomparable  great- 
ness aiid  glory.  Even  in  the  sanctuary  above,  where  all  is  stainless  purity,  the  minis- 
tering spirits  are  represented  as  veiling  their  faces  with  their  wings  before  the  mani- 
fested glory  of  Godhead ;  and  how  much  more  should  sinful  men  on  the  earth  be  alive 
to  his  av.-ful  majesty,  and  feel  unworthy  to  stand  amid  the  splendours  of  his  throne  ? 
If,  therefore,  he  should  so  far  condescend  as  to  pitch  among  them  a  tent  for  his  dwell- 
ing, we  might  certainly  have  expected  that  it  would  consist  of  two  apartments — one 
which  he  would  reserve  for  his  own  peculiar  residence,  and  another  to  which  they 
should  have  free  access,  who,  as  his  familiars,  were  to  be  permitted  to  dwell  with  him 
in  his  house.  For  in  this  way  alone  could  the  two  grand  ideas  of  the  glorious  majesty 
of  God,  which  raises  him  infinitely  above  his  people,  and  yet  of  his  covenant  nearness 
to  them,  be  reconciled  and  imaged  together. — Fairbairn,  Typology,  vol.  ii,  p.  249. 


362  PRINCIPLES   OF 

the  two  tables  of  testimony.  This  testimony  was  Jehovah's  decla- 
ration from  the  thick  darkness  (/?7^)  of  the  mount  on  which  he 
descended  in  smoke  and  fire,  and  would  remain  a  monumental  wit- 
ness of  his  wrath  against  sin.  The  ark  or  chest,  made  of  the  most 
durable  wood,  and  overlaid  within  and  without  with  gold,  was  a 
becoming  shrine  in  Avhich  to  preserve  inviolate  the  sacred  tables  of 
divine  testimony.  The  most  holy  God  is  jealous  (NJi2,  comp.  Exod. 
XX,  5)  for  the  honour  of  his  law.  Over  the  ark,  and  thus  covering 
the  testimony,  was  placed  the  capporeth  (niS3),  or  mercy  seat 
(Exod.  XXV,  21 ;  xxvi,  34),  to  be  sprinkled  with  blood  on  the  great 
day  of  atonement  (Lev.  xvi,  11-17).  This  was  a  most  significant 
symbol  of  mercy  covering  wrath.  Made  of  fine  gold,  and  having 
its  dimensions  the  same  as  the  length  and  breadth  of  the  ark  (Exod. 
XXV,  17),  it  fittingly  represented  that  glorious  provision  of  Infinite 
Wisdom  and  Love  by  which,  in  virtue  of  the  precious  blood  of 
Christ,  and  in  corajjlete  harmony  with  the  righteousness  of  God, 
atonement  is  made  for  the  guilty  but  penitent  transgressor.  The 
Septuagint  translates  rii23,  capporeth,  by  IXaariipiov,  which  word 
Paul  uses  in  Rom.  iii,  25,  where  he  speaks  of  the  "  righteousness  of 
God  through  faith  of  Jesus  Christ,"  and  "  the  redemption  [dnoXv- 
Tgo)aig)  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus,  whom  God  set  forth  an  expiatory 
covering  ['tXaorrjpiov),  through  faith  in  his  blood,"  etc.  The  divine 
provision  for  the  covering  of  sin  is  the  deepest  mystery  of  the  king- 
dom of  grace.  "It  must  be  noticed,"  says  Cremer,  "that  accord- 
ing to  Exod.  XXV,  22,  and  Lev.  xvi,  2,  the  Capporeth  is  the  central 
seat  of  the  saving  presence  and  gracious  revelation  of  God ;  so  that 
it  need  not  surprise  that  Christ  is  designated  IXaarrjpiov,  as  he  can 
be  so  designated  when  we  consider  that  he,  as  high  priest  and  sac- 
rifice at  the  same  time,  comes  ev  rep  Idio)  a"j.iarL  (in  his  own  blood), 
and  not  as  the  high  i)riest  of  the  Old  Testament,  kv  ainari  dXXorpiG) 
(with  blood  not  his  own)  which  he  must  discharge  himself  of  by 
sprinkling  on  the  Ca{)poreth.  The  Capporeth  was  so  far  the  princi- 
pal part  of  the  Holy  of  Holies,  that  the  latter  is  even  termed  *the 
house  of  the  capporeth'  (1  Chron.  xxviii,  11)."' 

The  two  cherubim,  placed   at  the  ends  of  the  mercyseat,  and 

spreading  their  wings  over  it,  were  objects  too  i>romi- 
The  Cherubim.      '■  J^        .  ,  *?      .  ^  -r     -r^  ■•  ,        i         i  ■ 

nent  to  1)0  without  significance.     In  Eden  the  cherubim 

appear  with  the  flaming  sword  to  watch  (i'^P')  the  way  of  the  tree 
of  life  (Gen.  iii,  24).  In  Ezek.  i,  5-14  they  appear  as  "  living  crea- 
tures" (ni'n),  their  composite  form  is  described,  and  they  are  rep- 
resented as  moving  the  mystic  wheels  of  divine  providence  and 
judgment   (vers.  15-21).      Over  their  heads  was   enthroned   "the 

'  Biblico-Theological  Lexicon,  p.  306. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  363 

appearance  of  the  likeness  of  the  glory  of  Jehovah"  (vers.  26-28). 
In  Rev.  iv,  6-8  they  appear  also  as  living  creatures  {(^0}a)  "  in  the 
midst  of  the  throne,  and  round  about  the  throne."  Whatever  the 
A'arious  import  of  these  figures,  we  note  that  they  everywhere  ap- 
pear in  most  intimate  relation  to  the  glory  of  God.  May  we  not 
believe  that  they  were  symbols  of  the  ultimate  glory  of  redeemed 
humanity,  conveying  at  the  same  time  profound  suggestions  of  the 
immanent  presence  and  intense  activity  of  God  in  all  creature  life, 
by  which  (presence  and  activity)  all  that  was  lost  in  Eden  shall  be 
restored  to  heavenly  places  in  Christ,  and  man,  redeemed  and  filled 
with  the  Spirit,  shall  again  have  power  over  the  tree  of  life,  which  is 
in  the  midst  of  the  paradise  of  God  (comp.  Rev.  ii,  7  and  xxii,  14)  ? 
Though  of  composite  form,  and  representing  the  highest  kinds  of 
creature  life  on  earth  (Ezek.  i,  10;  Rev.  iv,  7),  these  ideal  beings 
had  preeminently  the  likeness  of  a  man  (Exek,  i,  5).  Jehovah  is 
the  God  of  the  living,  and  has  about  the  throne  of  his  glory  the 
highest  symbols  of  life.  Both  at  the  gate  of  paradise  and  in  the 
Holy  of  Holies  these  cherubim  were  signs  and  pledges  that  in  the 
ages  to  come,  having  made  peace  through  the  blood  of  the  cross, 
God  would  reconcile  all  things  unto  himself,  whether  things  upon 
the  earth  or  things  in  the  heavens  (Col.  i,  20),  and  sanctify  them  in 
his  glory  (Exod.  xxix,  43).'  Then  the  redeemed  "  shall  reign  in 
life"  [ev  ^(o^  (SaacXevoovGtv)  through  Jesus  Christ  (Rom.  v,  17.) 

The  pot  of  manna,  Aaron's  rod  that  blossomed,  and  the  book  of 
the  law,  were  subseqiiently  deposited  by  the  ark  (Exod.  xvi,  33,  34; 
Num.  xvii,  10;  Dent,  xxxi,  26).  These  were  evidently  regarded  as 
so  many  additional  testimonies  of  God,  similar  in  character  to  the 

'  "  The  cherubim,"  says  Fairbairn,  "  were  in  their  very  nature  and  design  artificial 
forms  of  being — uniting  in  their  composite  structure  the  distinctive  features  of  the 
highest  Ivinds  of  creaturely  existence  on  earth — man's  first  and  chiefly.  They  were 
set  up  for  representations  to  the  eye  of  faith  of  earth's  living  creaturehood,  and  more 
especially  of  its  rational  and  immortal,  though  fallen  head,  with  reference  to  the  better 
hopes  and  destiny  in  prospect.  From  the  very  first  they  gave  promise  of  a  restored 
condition  to  the  fallen,  and  by  the  use  afterward  made  of  them  the  light  became 
clearer  and  more  distinct.  By  their  designations,  the  positions  assigned  them,  the  ac- 
tions from  time  to  time  ascribed  to  them,  as  well  as  their  own  peculiar  structure,  it 
was  intimated  that  the  good  in  prospect  should  be  secured,  not  at  the  expense  of,  but 
in  perfect  consistence  with,  the  claims  of  God's  righteousness — that  restoration  to  the 
holiness  must  precede  restoration  to  the  blessedness  of  life;  and  that  only  by  being 
made  capable  of  dwelling  beside  the  presence  of  the  only  Wise  and  Good  could  man 
hope  to  have  his  portion  of  felicity  recovered.  But  all  this,  they  further  betokened, 
it  was  in  God's  purpose  to  have  accomplished ;  and  so  to  do  it,  as,  at  the  same  time, 
to  raise  humanity  to  a  higher  than  its  original  destination — in  its  standing  nearei'  to 
God,  and  greatly  ennobled  in  its  powers  of  life  and  capacities  of  working." — Typology, 
vol.  i,  pp.  202,  203.     Comp.  also  vol.  ii,  p.  271. 


364  PRINCIPLES   OF 

two  tables  placed  within  the  ark,  and  they  were  accordingly  en- 
slnined  in  immediate  contiguity  with  them. 

As  the  Holy  of  Holies  symbolized  Jehovah's  relations  to  his  peo- 
ple, and  intimated  what  he  is  to  them  and  what  he  purposes  to  do 
for  them ;  and  as  its  symbols  of  mercy  covering  wrath  showed  how 
and  on  what  terms  he  condescends  to  meet  and  dwell  with  men ;  so, 
The  Holy  Place  o^i  the  other  hand,  the  holy  place,  with  its  golden  altar 
and  its  symbols.  Qf  incense,  table  of  showbread,  golden  candlestick,  and 
ministering  priests,  represented  the  relations  of  the  true  Israel 
toward  God.  The  priests  who  officiated  in  this  holy  place  acted 
not  for  themselves  alone;  they  were  the  representatives  of  all 
Israel,  and  their  service  was  the  service  of  all  the  tribes,  whose  pe- 
culiar relation  to  God,  so  long  as  they  obeyed  his  voice  and  kept 
his  covenant,  was  that  of  "a  kingdom  of  priests  and  a  holy  nation" 
(Exod.  xix,  5,  6;  comp.  1  Pet.  ii,  5,  9;  Rev.  i,  6 ;  v,  10).  As  the 
officiating  priest  stood  in  the  holy  place,  facing  the  Holy  of  Holies, 
The  Table  of  be  had  on  his  right  the  table  of  showbread,  on  his  left 
Showbread.  ^he  candlestick,  and  immediately  before  him  the  altar 
of  incense  (Exod.  xl,  22-27).  The  twelve  cakes  of  showbread  kept 
continually  on  the  table  symbolized  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel  con- 
tinually presented  as  a  living  sacrifice  before  God  (Lev.  xxiv,  5-9). 
"  The  laying  out  of  these  loaves,"  says  Keil,  "  assumed  the  form  of 
a  bloodless  sacrifice,  in  which  the  congregation  brought  the  fruit 
of  its  life  and  labour  before  the  face  of  the  Lord,  and  presented 
itself  to  its  God  as  a  nation  diligent  in  sanctification  to  good  works. 
If  the  showbread  was  a  minchah,  or  meat  offering,  and  even  a  most 
holy  one,  which  only  the  priests  were  allowed  to  eat  in  the  holy 
place,  it  must  naturally  have  been  unleavened,  as  the  unanimous 
testimony  of  Jewish  tradition  affirms  it  to  have  been."' 

The  golden  candlestick,  with  its  seven  lamps,  placed  opposite  the 
The  golden  table,  was  another  symbol  of  Israel  considered  as  the 
Candlestick.  Church  of  the  living  God.  As  the  showbread  repre- 
sented the  relation  of  Israel  to  God  as  a  holy  and  acceptable  offer- 
ing, the  candlestick  represented  what  this  same  Israel  would  do  for 
God  as  causing  the  light  of  the  Spirit  in  them  to  shine  forth.  To 
all  thus  exalted  may  it  well  be  said:  "Ye  were  once  darkness,  but 
now  light  in  the  Lord;  walk  as  children  of  light  (for  the  fruit  of 
the  light  is  in  all  goodness,  and  righteousness,  and  truth),  proving 
what  is  well  pleasing  unto  the  Lord"  (Eph.  v,  8-10). 

But  the  highest  continual  devotion  of  Israel  to  God  is  represented 
at  tlie  golden  altar  of  incense,  which  stood  immediately  before  the 

'  r>i!ilieal  Commentary  on  Lev.  xxiv,  0.  Comp.  Paul's  language  in  1  Cor.  v,  7,  and 
pp.  :515,  316  above. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  0C5 

veil  and  in  front  of  the  mercyseat  (Exod.  xxx,.  6).  The  offering 
of  incense  was  an  expressive  symbol  of  the  prayers  of  The  Altar  or  in- 
the  saints  (Psa,  cxli,  2;  Rev.  v,  8;  viii,  3,  4),  and  the  cense, 
whole  multitude  of  the  people  were  wont  to  pray  without  at  the 
hour  of  the  incense-offering  (Luke  i,  10).  Jehovah  was  pleased  to 
"inhabit  the  praises  of  Israel"  (Psa.  xxii,  3),  for  all  that  his  people 
may  be  and  do  in  their  consecrated  relation  to  him  expresses  itself 
in  their  prayers  before  his  altar  and  mercyseat.  "  But  it  ought 
ever  to  be  considered,"  says  Fairbairn,  "  what  kind  of  devotions  it 
is  that  rise  with  such  acceptance  to  the  sanctuary  above.  That  the 
altar  of  incense  stood  before  the  Lord,  under  his  immediate  eye, 
intimates  that  the  adorations  and  prayers  he  regards  must  be  no 
formal  service  in  which  the  lip  rather  than  the  heart  is  employed; 
but  a  felt  approach  to  the  presence  of  the  living  God,  and  a  real 
transaction  between  the  soul  and  him.  That  this  altar,  from  its 
very  position,  stood  in  a  close  relation  to  the  mercyseat  or  propitia- 
tory, on  the  one  hand,  and  by  its  character  and  the  live  coals  that 
ever  burned  in  its  golden  vials,  stood  in  an  equally  close  relation  to 
the  altar  of  burnt  offering,  on  the  other,  tells  us,  that  all  acceptable 
prayer  must  have  its  foundation  in  the  manifested  grace  of  a  re- 
deeming God,  and  draw  its  breath  of  life,  in  a  mannei-,  from  that 
Avork  of  propitiation,  which  he  has  in  his  own  person  accomplished 
for  the  sinful.  And  since  it  was  ordained  that  a  '  perpetual  incense 
before  the  Lord '  should  be  ever  ascending  from  the  altar — since 
injunctions  so  strict  were  given  for  having  the  earthly  sanctuary 
made  peculiarly  and  constantly  to  bear  the  character  of  a  house  of 
prayer,  most  culpably  deaf  must  Ave  be  to  the  voice  of  instruction 
that  issues  from  it  if  we  do  not  hear  enforced,  on  all  who  belong  to 
tlie  spiritual  temple  of  an  elect  church,  such  a  lesson  as  this — Pray 
without  ceasing;  the  spirit  of  devotion  is  the  very  element  of  your 
being;  your  beginning  and  ending  are  alike  here;  all,  from  first  to 
last,  must  be  sanctified  by  prayer;  and,  if  this  be  neglected,  neither 
can  you  fitly  be  named  a  house  of  God,  nor  have  you  any  ground 
to  expect  the  blessing  of  heaven  on  your  means  of  grace  and  works 
of  welldoing."  ' 

We  need  not  linger  in  detail  upon  the  symbolism  of  the  court  of 
the  tabernacle,  with  its  altar  of  burnt  offerings  and  its  gj-gat  Altar  and 
laver  of  brass.  There  could  be  no  approach  to  God,  on  Laver  in  the 
the  part  of  sinful  men,  no  possible  meeting  or  dwelling  '^^^^  ' 
Avith  him,  except  by  the  offerings  made  at  the  great  altar  in  front 
of  the  sacred  tent.  All  that  belongs  to  the  symbolism  of  sacrificial 
blood  centred  in  this  altar,  where  the  daily  offerings  of  Israel  were 

'  Typology,  vol.  ii,  pp.  287,  288. 


3GG  PRINCIPLES   OF 

made.  No  priest  might  pass  into  the  tabernacle  until  sprinkled 
with  blood  from  that  altar  (Exod.  xxix,  21),  and  the  live  coals 
used  for  the  burning  of  incense  before  Jehovah  were  taken  from 
the  same  place  (Lev.  xvi,  12).  Nor  might  the  priest,  on  penalty  of 
death,  minister  at  the  altar  or  enter  the  tabernacle  without  first 
washing  at  the  laver  (Exod.  xxx,  20,  21).  So  the  great  altar  con- 
tinually proclaimed  that  without  the  shedding  of  blood  there  is  no 
remission,  and  the  priestly  ablutions  denoted  that  without  the 
washing  of  regeneration  no  man  might  enter  the  kingdom  of  God 
(comp.  Psa.  xxiv,  3,  4;  John  iii,  5;  Heb.  x,  19-22).  All  those 
blessed  relations,  which  were  symbolized  in  the  holy  place,  are  pos- 
sible only  because  of  the  reconciliation  effected  at  the  altar  of  sac- 
rifice without.  Having  there  obtained  remission  of  sins,  the  true 
Israel,  as  represented  in  the  priests,  draw  near  before  God  in  forms 
of  holy  consecration  and  service." 

The  profound  symbolism  of  the  tabernacle  is  further  seen  in  con- 
symboiico-typ-  nexiou  with  the  offerings  of  the  great  day  of  atone- 

icai  sugges-  jng,^^^  Once  a  year  the  high  priest  entered  the  Holy  of 
tions  of  the  ,  •'  .  . 

High    Priest's  Holies  to  make  atonement  for  himself  and  Israel,  but  in 

day^of  Ttone-  connexion  with  his  work  on  that  day  all  parts  of  the 
meut.  tabernacle  are  brought  into  notice.     Having  washed  his 

flesh  in  Avater,  and  i)ut  on  the  hallowed  linen  garments,  he  first 
offered  the  burnt  offering  on  the  great  altar  to  make  atonement  for 
himself  and  his  house  (Lev.  xvi,  2-6).  Then  taking  a  censer  of  live 
coals  from  the  altar  he  offered  incense  upon  the  fire  before  the 
Lord,  so  that  the  cloud  covei'ed  the  mercyseat,  and,  taking  the 
blood  of  a  bullock  and  a  goat,  he  passed  within  the  veil  and  sprin- 
kled the  mercyseat  seven  times  with  the  blood  of  each  (Lev.  xvi, 
12-10).  All  this,  we  are  told  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  pre- 
figured the  work  of  Christ  for  us:  "Christ  having  come  a  high 
priest  of  the  good  things  to  come,  through  the  greater  and  more 
perfect  tabernacle  not  made  with  hands,  that  is,  not  of  this  crea- 
tion [not  material,  tangible,  or  local],  nor  through  the  blood  of 
goats  and  calves,  but  through  his  own  blood  entered  in  once  for  all 
into  the  holy  })laces  {ra  uyia,  })lural,  and  indefinitely  intimating 
more  than  places  merely),  having  obtained  eternal  redemption.  .  .  . 
For  Christ  entered  not  into  holy  (places)  made  with  hands,  pat- 
terns of  the  true,  but  into  the  heaven  itself,  now  to  appear  in  the 
presence  of  God  for  us"  (Heb.  ix,  11,  12,  24).     The  believer  is,  ac- 

'  "  The  holy  place,"  says  Kurtz,  "  represented  that  stage  in  the  history  of  salvation 
in  which  the  great  fact  of  vicarious  suffering  for  the  sins  of  the  world  lies  in  the  past, 
and  all  that  is  needed  is  the  personal  apiiropriation  of  the  atoning  virtue  of  the  blood 
ivhlcli  has  l)een  slicd." — Sacrificial  Worship  of  the  Old  Testament,  p.  315.   Edinb.,  1863. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  367 

corclingly,  exhorted  to  enter  with  confidence  into  the  holy  phaces 
by  tlie  blood  of  Jesus,  and  to  draw  near  with  a  true  heart  in  full 
assurance  of  faith  (Heb.  x,  19,  22).  Whither  our  high  priest  has 
gone  we  may  also  go,  and  the  position  of  the  cherubim  over  the 
mercyseat  and  in  the  garden  of  Eden,  suggests  the  final  glorifica- 
tion of  all  the  sons  of  God.  This  is  the  profound  and  suggestive 
teaching  of  Paul  in  Eph.  i,  15;  ii,  10,  where  he  speaks  of  "the 
riches  of  the  glory  of  his  inheritance  in  the  saints,"  and  "  that  ener- 
gy of  the  strength  of  his  might  which  he  wrought  in  Christ,  when 
he  raised  him  from  the  dead  and  made  him  sit  at  his  right  hand  in 
the  heavenly"  [ev  roig  eTTov^avioig,  not  heavenly  places  merely, 
but  heavenly  associations,  fellowships,  powers,  glories),  and  then 
goes  on  to  say  that  God,  in  like  manner,  quickens  those  who  were 
dead  in  trespasses  and  sins,  makes  them  alive  v/ith  Christ,  raises 
them  up  and  makes  them  sit  together  "  in  the  heavenly — in  Christ 
Jesus  "  {ev  rolg  errovgavloig,  i.  e.,  in  the  same  heavenly  regions,  asso- 
ciations, and  glories  into  which  Christ  himself  has  gone).  Tluis 
we  see  the  fullest  revelation  of  the  means  by  which,  and  the  extent 
to  which,  Israel  shall  be  sanctified  in  Jehovah's  glory  (Exod.  xxix, 
43).'  Then,  in  the  highest  and  holiest  sense,  will  "  the  tabernacle  of 
God  be  with  men,  and  he  will  tabernacle  with  them,  and  they  shall 
be  his  people,  and  God  himself  shall  be  with  them  "  (Rev.  xxi,  3). 
In  the  heavenly  glory  there  will  be  no  place  for  temple,  or  any 
local  shrine  and  symbol,  "  for  the  Lord,  the  God,  the  Almighty,  is 
its  temple,  and  the  Lamb"  (Rev.  xxi,  22). 

The  graduated  sanctity  of  the  several  parts  of  the  tabernacle  is 
very  noticeable.     In  front  was  the  court,   into  which  ^^^  graduated 
any  Israelite  who  was  ceremonially  clean  might  enter;   sanctity  of  the 
next  was  the  holy  place,  into  which  none  but  the  con-     °  ^  ^  ^^^^' 
secrated  priests  might  go  to  perform  the  work  of  their  office,  and, 

'  The  profound  expression,  in  Exod.  xxix,  43,  may  well  be  compared  with  that  of 
Jesus,  in  John  xvii,  24,  which,  according  to  the  best-authenticated  text,  reads :  "  Fa- 
ther, that  which  thou  hast  given  me  (o  dsSuKug  (ioi\  I  will  that  where  I  am  they  also 
{kukeIvoi)  may  be  with  me,  that  they  may  behold  my  glory  which  thou  hast  given  me, 
for  thou  didst  love  me  before  the  foundation  of  the  world."  the  pleonastic  construc- 
tion here  seems  to  have  a  designed  significance.  The  whole  body  of  the  redeemed  is 
first  conceived  as  a  unit ;  it  is  Christ's  inheritance,  regarded  as  the  Father's  gift  to 
him.  •  It  is  the  same  as  the  nuv  o  Sf^ukev  fioi,  all  that  which  he  has  given  me,  in  John 
vi,  39.  But  as  the  thought  turns  to  the  individual  beholding  (comp.  "  I  shall  see  for 
myself,"  etc..  Job  xix,  2T')  on  the  part  of  the  redeemed  the  plural  (kukeIvoi)  is  re- 
sumed.- Thus  Alford :  "  The  neuter  has  a  peculiar  solemnity,  uniting  the  whole 
Church  together  as  one  gift  of  the  Father  to  the  Son.  Then  the  kukeIvol  resolves  it 
into  the  great  multitude  whom  no  man  can  number,  and  comes  home  to  the  heart  of 
every  individual  believer  with  inexpressibly  sv.eet  assurance  of  an  eternity  witli 
Christ." — Greek  Test.,  in  loco. 


nC3  PRINCIPLES    OF 

especially,  to  offer  incense.  Beyond  this,  veiled  in  thick  darkness, 
was  the  Holy  of  Holies,  into  which  only  the  high  priest  entered,  and 
he  but  once  a  year.  This  graduated  sanctity  of  the  holy  places  was 
fitted  to  inculcate  and  impress  the  lesson  of  the  absolute  holiness 
of  God,  whose  special  presence  was  manifested  in  the  innermost 
sanctuary.  The  several  apartments  were  also  adapted  to  show  the 
gradual  and  progressive  stages  of  divine  revelation.  The  outer 
court  suggests  the  early  patriarchal  period,  when,  under  the  open 
.sky,  the  devout  fathers  of  families  and  nations,  like  Noah,  Mel- 
chizedek,  and  Abraham,  worshipped  the  God  of  lieaven.'  The  holy 
j)Iace  represents  the  period  of  Mosaism,  that  intermediate  stage  of 
revelation  and  law,  when  many  a  type  and  symbol  foreshadowed 
the  better  things  to  come,  and  the  exceptional  entrance  of  the  high 
priest  once  a  year  v/ithin  the  veil  signified  that  "  the  way  of  the 
holies  was  not  yet  made  manifest "  (Heb.  ix,  8).  The  Holy  of  Holies 
represents  the  Messianic  seon,  when  the  Christian  believer,  having 
boldness  to  enter  into  the  holiest  by  the  blood  of  Jesus  (Heb.  x,  19), 
is  conceived  to  "have  come  to  Mount  Zion,  and  to  the  city  of  the 
living  God,  the  heavenly  Jerusalem,  and  to  myriads  of  angels, 
to  the  whole  assembly  and  Church  of  the  firstborn  who  are  enrolled 
in  heaven,  and  to  God,  the  judge  of  all,  and  to  spirits  of  just  men 
made  perfect,  and  to  Jesus,  mediator  of  the  new  covenant,  and  to 
the  blood  of  sprinkling  that  speaks  better  than  that  of  Abel " 
(Heb.  xii,  22-24). 

The  symbolism  of  the  tabernacle  furnishes  much  of  the  imagery 
used  in  the  records  of  subsequent  revelations,  and  is,  therefore, 
worthy  of  the  most  careful  study.'^  But  in  this,  as  in  other  forms 
of  expressing  divine  thoughts  in  figure,  we  should  avoid  attempt- 
ing to  find  meanings  in  every  minute  object  and  allusion.  Our 
best  security  is  to  keep  closely  to  the  analogy  of  biblical  symbols 
and  imagery  as  seen  in  a  full  collation  of  pertinent  examples.' 

'  For  a  somewhat  different  conception  of  the  import  of  the  holy  places,  as  repre- 
senting periods  of  revelation,  see  Atwater,  Sacred  Tabernacle  of  the  Hebrews,  pp. 
2G9-2'71. 

''Such  passages  as  Psa.  xxvii,  5  ;  xxxi,  20;  xci,  1,  are  best  explained  by  understand- 
ing an  allusion  to  the  Holy  of  Holies.  The  symbolico-typical  portraiture  of  the  Messi- 
anic kingdom,  in  the  closing  chapters  of  Ezekiel  and  John,  is  largely  based  upon  the 
symbolir^m  of  the  tabernacle.      See  furtlier  on  pp.  4!)1,  4'.)2. 

^  Valuable  hints  for  the  study  of  biblical  symbolism  may  be  found  in  works  on  gen- 
eral syrabology,  such  as  Nork's  Etymologisch-symboiisch-mythologisches  Worter- 
buch  (four  vols.,  Stuttgart,  1843-1845),  and  Wemyss,  Clavis  Symbolica  (Edinb.  Bib. 
Cabinet,  18:ir)).  See  also  Mills,  Sacred  Symbology  (Edinb.,  1853),  Dudley,  Naology, 
etc.  (London,  184G),  Thompson,  Symbols  of  Christendom  (London,  1867). 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  86d 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

SYMBOLICO-TYPICAL    ACTIONS. 

Ik  receiving  liis  divine  commission  as  a  prophet,  Ezekiel  saw  a  roll 

of   a  book  spread  out  before  bim,  on  both  sides  of 

,  .  ,  .  ^  1    1    ,.   1    ^1  •  TT  Visional  actions, 

winch  were  written  many  doleful  things.       He  was 

commanded  to  eat  the  book,  and  he  obeyed,  and  found  that  which 
seemed  so  full  of  lamentation  and  Avoe  to  be  sweet  as  honey  in  his 
mouth  (Ezek.  ii,  8-iii,  3).  The  same  thing  is,  in  substance,  re- 
located in  the  Apocalypse  of  John  (x,  2,  8-11),  and  it  is  there  ex- 
pressly added  that  the  book  which  was  sweet  as  honey  in  his  mouth 
became  bitter  in  his  stomach.  These  transactions  manifestly  took 
place  in  vision.  The  prophet  was  lifted  into  a  divine  trance  or 
ecstacy,  in  which  it  seemed  to  him  that  he  saw,  heard,  obeyed,  and 
experienced  the  effects  which  he  describes.  It  was  a  symbolical 
transaction,  performed  subjectively  in  a  state  of  prophetic  ecstacy. 
It  was  an  impressive  method  of  fastening  upon  his  soul  the  convic- 
tion of  his  25rophetic  mission,  and  its  import  was  not  difficult  to 
apprehend.  The  book  contained  the  bitter  judgments  to  be  uttered 
against  "the  house  of  Israel,"  and  the  prophet  was  commanded  to 
cause  his  stomach  to  eat  it  and  to  fill  his  bowels  with  it  (iii,  3);  that 
is,  he  must  make  the  prophetic  word,  as  it  were,  a  part  of  himself, 
receive  it  into  his  innermost  being  (ver.  10),  and  there  digest  it. 
And  though  it  fnay  be  often  bitter  to  his  inner  sense,  the  process 
of  prophetic  obedience  yields  a  sweet  experience  to  the  doer.'  "It 
is  infinitely  sweet  and  lovely,"  says  Hengstenberg,  "  to  be  the  organ 
and  spokesman  of  the  Most  High."  ^ 

But  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  chapters  of  Ezekiel  we  are  introduced 
to  a  series  of  four  symbolico-typical  actions  in  which   gynj|)o]i(,o.typ. 

the  prophet  appears  not  as  the  seer,  but  the  c?oer.     First  icai  acts  of 

■u     •  TT^j_i  I'lai  v    Ezek.  iv  and  v. 

ne  IS  commanded  to  take  a  brick    and  engrave  upon  it 

a  portraiture  of  Jerusalem  in  a  state  of  siege.     He  is  also  to  set 

'  What  Ezekiel  and  John  did  in  Tision  Jeremiah  describes  in  other  and  more  sim- 
ple style.     Comp.  Jer.  xv,  16. 

-  Commentary  on  Ezekiel,  in  loco. 

^  run?,  a  white  brick,  so  called,  according  to  Gesenius,  from  the  white  chalky  clay 
of  which  certain  bricks  were  made.     In  the  valley  of  the  Euphrates  Ezekiel's  eyes 
had,  doubtless,  become  familiar  with  bricks  and  stone  slabs  covered  with  images  and 
inscriptions. 
24 


870  PRINCIPLES   OP 

up  an  iron  pan  between  it  and  himself,  and  direct  his  face  against 
it,  as  if  he  were  the  besieging  party,  and  had  erected  an  iron  wall 
between  himself  and  the  doomed  city.  This,  it  was  declared,  would 
be  "a  sign  to  the  house  of  Isi-ael"  (Ezek,  iv,  1-3).  Evidently, 
therefore,  the  sign  was  intended  to  be  outward,  actual,  and  visible, 
for  how  could  these  things,  if  imagined  only  in  the  prophet's  soul, 
be  made  a  sign  to  Israel  ?  In  the  next  place  he  is  to  lie  upon  his 
left  side  three  hundred  and  ninety  days,  and  then  upon  his  right 
side  forty  days,  thus  symbolically  bearing  the  guilt  of  Israel  and 
Judah  four  hundred  and  thirty  days,  each  day  of  his  prostration 
denoting  a  year  of  Israel's  abject  condition.  During  this  time  he 
must  keep  his  face  turned  toward  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  and  his 
arm  made  bare  (comp,  Isa.  lii,  10),  and  God  lays  bands  upon  him 
that  he  shall  not  turn  from  one  side  to  another  (Ezek.  iv,  4-8). 
As  the  days  of  this  prostration  are  symbolical  of  years,  so  it  would 
seem  the  number  four  hundred  and  thirty  is  appropriated  from  the 
term  of  Israel's  sojourn  in  Egypt  (Exod.  xii,  40),  the  last  forty 
years  of  which,  when  Moses  was  in  exile,  were  the  most  oppressive 
of  all.  Tliis  number  would,  from  its  dark  associations,  become  nat- 
urally sjnnbolical  of  a  period  of  humiliation  and  exile;  not,  how- 
ever, necessarily  denoting  a  chronological  period  of  just  so  many 
years.  Still  further,  the  proj^het  is  directed  to  prepare  for  himself 
The  prophet's  food  of  divers  grains  and  vegetables,  some  desirable 
'°°<^-  and  some  undesirable,  and  put  them  in  one  vessel,  as  if 

it  were  necessary  to  use  any  and  all  kinds  of  available  food,  and 
one  vessel  would  suffice  for  all.  His  food  and  drink  are  to  be 
weighed  out  and  measured,  and  in  such  small  rations  as  to  denote 
the  most  pinching  destitution.  He  is  also  commanded  to  bake 
his  barley  cakes  with  human  excrement,  to  denote  how  Israel  would 
eat  their  defiled  bread  among  the  heathen;  but  in  view  of  his  loath- 
ing at  tlie  thought  of  food  thus  prepared,  he  is  permitted  to  sub- 
stitute the  excrement  of  cattle  for  tliat  of  man.  All  this  was  de- 
signed to  symbolize  the  misery  and  anguish  which  should  come 
upon  Israel  (verses  9-17).  A  fourth  sign  follows  in  chapter  v, 
1-4,  and  is  accompanied  (verses  5-1 V)  by  a  divine  interpretation. 
The  prophet  is  directed  to  shave  off  his  hair  and  beard  with  a 
sharp  sword,  and  weigh  and  divide  the  numberless  hairs  in  three 
parts.  One  third  he  is  to  burn  in  the  midst  of  the  city  (i.  e,,  the 
city  portrayed  on  the  brick),  another  third  he  is  to  smite  with  tlic 
sword,  and  another  he  is  to  scatter  to  the  wind.  These  three  acts 
are  explained  as  proj^hetic  symbols  of  a  threefold  judgment  im- 
pending over  Jerusalem,  one  part  of  whose  inhabitants  shall  perisli 
ly  pestilence  and  famine,  another  by  the  slaughter  of  war,  and  a 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  371 

third  by  dispersion  among  the  nations,  whither  also  the  perils  of 
the  sword  shall  follow  them. 

Many  able  expositors  insist  that  these  symbolical  actions  of  the 
prophet  took  place  only  in  vision,  as  the  eating  of  the  The  actions  out- 
roll  in  chapter  ii,  8.  And  yet  they  are  all  obliged  to  ward  and  actual. 
acknowledge  that  the  language  used  is  such  as  to  make  a  differ- 
ent impression  on  the  mind  of  a  reader.  Certain  it  is  that  the  eat- 
ing of  the  roll  is  described  as  a  vision:  "  I  saw,  and  behold  a  hand 
stretched  out  unto  me,  and  behold  in  it  a  roll  of  a  book  "  (Ezek. 
ii,  9).  No  such  language  is  used  in  connexion  with  the  transac- 
tions of  chapters  iv  and  v,  but  the  proi3het  is  the  doer,  and  his  ac- 
tions are  to  serve  as  a  sign  to  the  house  of  Isi-ael. 

Five  reasons  have  been  urged  to  show  that  these  actions  could 
not  have  been  outward  and  actual:  (1)  The  spectacle  of  Five  objections 
such  a  miniature  siege  would  only  have  provoked  among  considered, 
the  Israelites  who  saw  it  a  sense  of  the  ludicrous.  But  even  if  this 
were  true,  it  would  by  no  means  disprove  that  the  acts  were,  never- 
theless, actually  done,  for  many  of  the  noblest  oracles  of  prophecy 
were  ridiculed  and  scoffed  at  by  the  rebellious  house  of  Israel.  The 
assertion,  however,  is  purely  a  subjective  fancy  of  modern  inter- 
preters. It  is  like  the  untenable  notion  of  those  allegorical  ex- 
pounders of  Canticles,  who  presume  to  say  that  a  literal  interpreta- 
tion of  some  parts  of  the  song  is  monstrous  and  revolting,  but,  at  the 
same  time,  allegorically  descriptive  of  the  holiest  things !  If  these 
symbolic  actions  of  Ezekiel,  literally  performed,  would  have  been 
childish  and  ludicrous,  would  not  any  conceivable  communication 
of  them  to  Israel  as  a  sign  have  been  equally  ludicrous  ?  As  long 
as  the  actions  were  possible  and  practicable,  and  were  calculated  to 
make  a  notable  impression,  there  is  no  objection  to  their  literal  oc- 
currence which  may  not  be  urged  with  equal  force  against  their 
ideal  occurrence. 

But  it  is  urged  (2)  that  lying  motionless  on  one  side  for  three 
hundred  and  ninety  days  was  a  physical  impossibility.  ^^^  rostraf 
The  prophet's  language,  however,  sufficiently  intimates  not  witiiout  in- 
that  his  prostration  was  not  absolutely  continuous  dur- 
ing the  whole  twenty- four  hours  of  each  of  the  days.  He  prepared 
his  own  food  and  drink,  weighed  and  measured  it,  and,  we  may 
suppose,  that  as  a  Jewish  fast  of  many  days  allowed  eating  at 
night  while  requiring  abstinence  by  day,  so  Ezekiel's  long  [irostra- 
tion  had  many  incidental  reliefs.  The  prohibition  of  turning  from 
one  side  to  another  required,  at  most,  only  that  during  the  longer 
period  he  must  not  lie  at  all  on  his  right  side,  and  during  the 
last  forty  days  he  must  not  lie  at  all  on  his  left.     (3)  Fairbairn 


373  PRINCIPLES   OF 

declares  that  it  would  have  been  a  moral  impossibility  to  eat  bread 
composed  of  such  abominable  materials,  since  it  would  have  in- 
volved a  violation  of  the  Mosaic  law.'  But  it  cannot  be  shown  that 
the  law  anywhere  prohibits  the  materials  which  Ezekiel  was  ordered 
to  prepare  for  his  food;  and,  even  if  it  did,  it  would  not  follow  that 
Ezekiel  might  not  thus  symbolically  exhibit  the  penal  judgments 
that  were  to  visit  Israel,  when  fathers  should  even  eat  their  own 
sons,  and  sons  their  fathers  (chap,  v,  10). 

Another  objection  (4)  is  that  between  the  dates  given  at  Ezek. 
The  Dates  no  h  I5  2,  and  viii,  1,  there  could  not  have  been  four  hun- 
vaiid objection,  dred  and  thirty  days  for  these  symbolical  actions  to 
really  take  place.  But  between  the  fifth  day  of  the  fourth  month 
of  the  fifth  year  of  Jehoiachin's  captivity  (chap,  i,  1,  2)  and 
the  fifth  day  of  the  sixth  month  of  the  sixth  year  (chap,  viii,  1) 
there  intervened  one  year  and  two  months,  or  four  hundred  and 
twenty-seven  days,  a  period  not  only  sufficiently  approximate  to 
meet  all  the  necessity  of  the  case,  but  so  closely  approximate  as  to 
be  in  itself  an  evidence  of  the  real  performance  of  these  actions. 
And  all  this  might  be  said  after  subtracting  from  the  period  the 
seven  days  mentioned  in  chapter  iii,  15.  But  the  visions  of  chap- 
ters viii,  xi  may  have  taken  place  while  Ezekiel  yet  remained  lying 
on  his  side.  We  are  not  to  suppose  that  his  body  was  literally 
transported  to  Jerusalem,  for  he  expressly  states  that  it  was  done 
"  in  visions  of  God  "  (chap,  viii,  3).  His  sitting  in  his  house,  with 
the  elders  of  Judah  before  him  (viii,  1),  does  not  necessarily  define 
either  his  or  their  posture,  and  the  word  3C^^  is  commonly  used  in 
the  sense  of  abiding  or  staying.  The  long  prostration  and  symbol- 
ical acts  of  this  priest-prophet  would  naturally  attract  the  elders  of 
Judah  to  his  house,  and  cause  them  to  linger  long  in  his  presence; 
and  all  this  time  his  arm  was  made  bare,  and  he  prophesied  against 
Jerusalem  (iv,  7).  There  was  nothing  in  his  posture  or  surround- 
ings to  hinder  his  receiving,  during  that  signal  year  and  two 
months,  many  an  additional  word  and  vision  of  Jehovah.  (5)  It 
has  been  further  objected  that  it  was  literally  impossible  for  him 
to  burn  the  third  part  of  his  hair  "in  the  midst  of  the  city"  (chap, 
v,  2).  But  the  city  here  referred  to  is  to  be  understood  of  the 
miniature  city  engraved  on  the  brick,  which  consideration  at  once 
obviates  the  objection. 

'  Commentary  on  Ezekiel,  p.  48.  Fairbairn's  references  to  Dent,  xiv,  3;  xxiii,  12- 
14,  and  xiii,  1-5,  are  pointless  in  this  argument,  for  those  passages  have  no  neces- 
sary bearing  on  this  subject,  inasipuch  as  Ezekiel  was  excused  from  using  human  or- 
dure. Nor  was  a  mixture  of  various  kinds  of  food  a  transgression,  as  Hitzig'  imagines, 
of  the  law  of  Lev.  xix,  19;  Deut.  xxii,  9. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  373 

There  aj^pears,  thex-efore,  no  sufficient  reason  to  deny  that  Ezeldel's 
symbolic  actions,  described  in  chapters  iv  and  v,  were  No  valid  arpu- 
outwardly  performed.  Nor  is  it  difficult  to  conceive  the  ^l^^  oufSS 
impression  which  these  performances  must  naturally  performance. 
have  made  upon  the  house  of  Israel — especially  upon  the  elders. 
After  his  first  overwhelming  vision  (see  chap,  i,  28),  and  the  hear- 
ing of  his  divine  commission,  he  went  to  certain  captives  who  dwelt 
along  the  Chebar,  and  sat  down  among  them  in  mute  astonishment 
(DpJi'D)  for  seven  days  (chap,  iii,  15).  Then  Jehovah's  word  came 
to  him  again,  and  he  went  forth  into  the  plain,  and  there  again 
beheld  the  glory  of  the  cherubim  (ver.  23),  and  received  the 
command  to  go  and  shut  himself  up  within  his  house,  and  per- 
form the  symbolical  actions  which  we  have  examined.  And  no 
more  impressive  or  signal  prophecies  could  have  been  given  than 
these  symbolic  deeds.  Not  to  have  done  the  things  commanded 
would  have  been  to  withhold  from  the  house  of  Israel  the  signs  of 
judgment  which  he  was  commissioned  to  exhibit.  The  fourfold 
symbol  denoted,  (1)  the  coming  siege  of  Jerusalem,  (2)  the  exile 
and  consequent  prostration  of  Israel  and  Judah  (comp.  Isa.  1,  11; 
Amos  V,  2),  which  should  be  like  another  Egyptian  bondage,  (3) 
the  destitution  and  humiliation  of  this  sad  period,  and,  (4)  finally, 
the  threefold  judgment  with  which  the  siege  should  end,  namely, 
pestilence  and  famine,  the  sword,  and  dispersion  among  the  nations. 

Other  symbolical  actions  of  this  prophet  are  his  removal  of  his 
baggage  through  the  broken  wall  (chap,  xii,  3-8),  and  other  symboii- 
his  eating  his  bread  with  quaking,  and  drinking  water  cai  actions. 
with  trembling  and  anxiety  (xii,  18),  his  deep  and  bitter  sighing 
(xxi,  6;  Heb.  xxi,  11),  and  his  strange  deportment  on  the  death  of 
his  wife  (xxiv,  16-18).  But  the  symbol  of  the  boiling  caldron  in 
chap,  xxiv,  3-1 2,  is  expressly  presented  as  an  uttered  parable,  or 
symbolical  discourse,  and  the  imagery  is,  accordingly,  ideal,  and 
not  to  be  understood  of  an  outward  action.  The  symbolical  ac- 
tions of  Isaiah  (xx,  2-4)  and  Jeremiah  (xiii,  11;  xviii,  1-6;  xix, 
1-2;  xxvii,  1-14,  and  xliii,  8-13)  are,  like  those  of  Ezckiel,  amply 
explained  in  their  immediate  context. 

Of  all  the  symbolical  actions  of  the  prophets  the  most  difficult 
and  disputed  example  is  that  of  Hosea  taking  unto  Hosea's  Mar- 
himself  "a  woman  of  whoredoms  and  children  of  "^s^- 
whoredoms"  (Hosea  i,  2),  and  his  loving  "a  woman  beloved  of 
a  friend,  and  an  adulteress"  (Hosea  iii,  l).  The  great  question 
is  :  Are  these  transactions  to  be  understood  as  mere  visional 
symbols,  or  as  real  events  in  the  outward  life  of  the  prophet  ? 
No   one  will  venture  to  deny  that  the  language   of  Hosea  most 


374  PRINCIPLES   OF 

natiinilly  implies  that  the  events  were  outward  and  real.     He  plain- 
ly says  that  Jehovah  commanded  him  to  go  and  marry  an 

Language    im-     J       J  t>  j  " 

piles  outward  adulterous  woman,  and  that  he  obeyed.  He  gives  the 
^    **^'  name  of  the  woman  and  the  name  of  her  father,  and 

says  that  she  conceived  and  bore  him  a  son,  whom  he  named  Jezreel, 
and  subsequently  she  bore  him  a  daughter  and  another  son,  to  whom 
he  also  gave  significant  names  as  God  directed  him.  There  is  no 
intimation  whatever  that  these  events  were  merely  visions  of  the 
soul,  or  that  they  were  to  be  published  to  Israel  as  a  purely  jsara- 
bolic  discourse.  If  the  account  of  any  symbolical  action  on  record 
is  so  explicit  and  positive  as  to  require  a  literal  interpretation,  this 
surely  is  one,  for  its  terms  are  clear,  its  language  is  simple,  and  its 
general  import  not  difficult  to  comprehend. 

Whence,  then,  the  difficulties  which  expositors  have  felt  in  its  in- 
Supposed  impos-  terpretation  ?      Ii   is  mainly  in   the   supposition  that 

sibiiity  based  such  a  marriage,  commanded  by  God  and  effected  by 
on  Misapprehen-  ^  ,..,.,.  .  - 

sion  of  Scope  and  a  holy  projihet,  was  a  moral  impossibility.     A  part  oi 

Import,  ^]jQ  difficulty  has  also  arisen  from  a  misapprehension 

of  the  meaning  of  certain  alhisions,  and  the  scope  of  the  entire  pas- 
sage. Uj^on  these  misapprehensions  false  assumptions  have  been 
based,  and  false  interpretations  have  naturally  followed.  Thus,  it 
has  been  assumed  that  the  three  children  of  the  prophet,  Jezreel, 
Lo-ruhamah,  and  Lo-ammi,  were  themselves  the  "  children  of  whore- 
doms "  whom  the  prophet  was  to  take,  and  that  the  prophet's  wife 
herself  continued  her  dissolute  life  after  her  marriage  with  him.  Of 
all  this  there  is  nothing  in  the  text.  The  most  simple  and  natural 
meaning  of  "  a  woman  of  whoredoms  and  children  of  whoredoms  " 
(chap,  i,  2)  is  a  woman  who  is  a  notable  harlot,  and  who,  as  such,  has 
begotten  children  who  also  follow  her  lewd  practices.  If  it  had 
been  otherwise,  and  the  prophet  had  been  directed  to  take  a  pure 
virgin,  the  language  of  our  text  would  have  been  utterly  out  of 
place.  For  how  could  Hosea  know  how  and  where  to  select  a  vir- 
gin who  would,  after  her  marriage  with  him,  become  a  harlot? 
That  the  prophet's  wife  contintied  her  lewd  practices  after  her 
marriage  Avith  him  is  nowhere  intimated. 

The  straightforward,  literal  statement  that  the  prophet  "went 
and  took  Gomer,  the  daughter  of  Diblaim,  and  she  conceived  and 
bare  him  a  son  "  (ver.  3),  is  the  furthest  possible  from  describing 
something  which  occurred  only  in  idea.  The  sophism  of  Hengs- 
tenberg,  that  these  things  took  place  "  actually,  but  not  outwardly,"  ' 

'  ChristoloKy  of  the  Old  Testament,  En,£;lish  translation  (Edinb.,  1863),  vol.  i,  p. 
185.  Hcng.stenberg's  whole  discus.'^ion  of  this  subject,  which  assumes  to  be  very  full 
and  thorough,  is  a  notable  exhibition  of  exegetieal  dogmatism. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  375 

is  too  glaring  to  be  for  a  moment  entertained.     If  the  things  here 
narrated  had  no  outward  reality  in  the  prophet's  life,   ^ 

.     .  •'  n  T      Gcmer  and  Dib- 

it IS  an  abuse  of  language  to  say  they  actually  occurred,   laim  not  sym- 

All  attempts  to  explain  the  names  Gomer  and  Dib-  ^oucai  names. 
laim  symbolically  are  manifest  failures,  and  Schmoller  is  candid 
enough  to  admit  that  "  we  cannot  say  that,  in  themselves,  they  nec- 
essarily demand  such  an  explanation."  '  Gomer  may  indeed  denote 
completion,  but  no  parallel  usage  justifies  the  meaning  of  "com- 
pleted whoredom,"  which  most  English  expositors  adopt  from  Aben 
Ezra  and  Jerome.  The  verb  IDS  means  either  to  come  to  an  end 
in  the  sense  of  ceasing  to  exist  (Psa.  vii,  10;  xii,  2;  Ixxvii,  9),  or  to 
complete,  or  bring  to  perfection,  in  a  good  sense  (Psa,  Ivii,  3; 
cxxxviii,  8;  comp.  the  Chaldee  "iM  in  Ezra  vii,  12).  Gesenius  and 
Fiirst  (Heb.  Lex.)  suggest  the  meaning  of  coals,  heat,  or  fircglow. 
The  name  of  Diblaim  is  also  too  uncertain  to  warrant  a  symbol- 
ical interpretation.  If  we  allow  its  identity  with  Qv^'H,  jig  calces, 
the  explanation,  "completed  whoredom,  the  daughter  of  two  fig 
cakes,"  is  sufticiently  awkward  and  far-fetched  to  discredit  the 
whole  interpretation. 

Hengstenberg  is  also  guilty  of  the  bold  and  remarkable  assertion 
that  "  there  exists  a  multitude  of  symbolical  actions,  in  „      , 

,.,..  .  "^  .  .        Hengstenberg  s 

regard  to  which  it  is  undeniable  and  universally  admit-  unwarrantable 
ted  (!)  that  they  took  place  internally  only."  '  He  does  ^^^«^""'^- 
not  deign  to  inform  us  what  they  are,  and  we  may  with  equal  pro- 
priety, therefore,  afiirm  that  there  is  not  a  single  instance  of  a  vis- 
ion, or  of  a  symbolical  action,  that  took  place  only  internally,  but  that 
there  is  in  the  context  something  which  clearly  indicates  its  vis- 
ional character.  Jeremiah's  taking  the  wine  cujj  of  Jehovah's  fury 
and  presenting  it  to  the  nations  (Jer.  xxv,  15-33)  is  not  a  parallel 
ease,  but  is  metaphorical,  as  the  expression  "  cup  of  the  wine  of  this 
fury"  (ver.  15)  abundantly  shows.  This  is  confirmed  by  its  causal 
connexion  (''3,  for)  with  verse  14,  and  by  the  whole  tone  and  spirit 
of  the  passage,  which  is  highly  figurative;  see,  especially,  verses 
27-31.  The  same  is  true  of  Zech.  xi,  4-14,  where  the  prophet  by 
inspiration  identifies  himself  with  the  Lord,  and  describes  no  vis- 
ion, or  internal  transaction,  but  a  highly  figurative  account  of  the 
relations  of  the  Lord  and  Israel.  The  breaking  of  the  staves. 
Beauty  and  Bands,  was  the  Lord's  doing,  and  not  that  of  the  proph 
et.  Much  more  scientific  and  trustworthy  is  the  procedure  of 
Cowles,  who  collates  all  the  Old  Testament  examples  bearing  on 
this  point,  and  exhibits  "  a  clear  line  of  distinction  drawn  betw"een 

'  Commentary  on  Hosea  (Lange's  Biblework),  in  loco. 
'■^  Christology,  vol.  i,  p.  186. 


376  PRINCIPLES  OF 

the  tilings  seen  and  shown  in  vision  only,  and  those  which  were 
done  in  outward  life  for  symbolic  or  other  purposes.  These  dis- 
tinctions," he  observes,  "  lie  not  mainly — indeed  scarcely  at  all — in 
the  nature  of  the  things  as  convenient  to  be  done,  or  as  impossible, 
but  in  the  very  form  of  the  statements.  In  other  words,  the  Lord 
has  been  specially  careful  to  leave  us  in  no  doubt  as  to  Avhat  was 
actually  do?ie  by  his  j^rophets  on  the  one  hand,  and  what  was  only 
seen  by  them  in  vision  on  the  other."  ' 

The  proj)het  Hosea  was  not  commanded  to  go  and  rehearse  a  par- 
able  before  the  people,  nor  to  relate  what  occurred  to 

1  tlG      itlCtS     US  •  •    •  t  ■  • 

stated  not  in-  him  m  Vision,  but  to  perform  certain  actions.  The  time 
Bupposabie.  necessary  for  his  marriage,  and  the  birth  of  the  three 
children  of  Gomer,  need  have  been  no  greater  than  that  in  which 
Isaiah  was  required  to  walk  naked  and  barefoot  for  a  sign  (Isa. 
XX',  8).  The  names  of  the  three  children  are  symbolical  of  certain 
purposes  and  plans  of  God  in  his  dealings  with  the  house  of  Israel, 
but  thei'e  is  no  hint  that  these  children  were  at  all  given  to  licentious- 
ness. Their  names  point  to  coming  judgments,  as  did  the  name  of 
Isaiah's  son  (Isa.  viii,  3),  but  those  symbolical  names  are  no  dispar- 
agement of  the  character  of  the  persons  who  bore  them.  As  long 
as  Gomer  was  no  man's  lawful  wife,  her  marriage  to  Hosea,  even 
though  she  had  become  noted  as  a  harlot,  and  had  thus  begotten 
"children  of  whoredoms,"  involved  no  breach  of  law.  The  law 
governing  a  priest's  marriage  (Lev.  xxi,  7-15),  and  which  even  pro- 
hibited his  marrying  a  widow,  did  not  apply  to  a  prophet  more 
than  to  any  other  man  in  Israel.  Iliat  a  prophet  should  marry  a 
harlot,  and  take  her  children  with  her,  was  indeed  surprising,  and 
calculated  to  excite  wonder  and  astonishment;  but  to  excite  such 
wonder,  and  deeply  impress  it  on  the  popular  heart,  was  the  very 
purpose  of  the  whole  transaction.  We  cannot  conceive  how  the  ac- 
tions here  recorded  could  have  been  made  signs  and  wonders  in  Is- 
rael (comp.  Isa.  viii,  18),  or  have  been  at  all  impressive,  if  they  were 
known  to  have  never  occurred.  In  that  case  they  would  have  been 
either  ridiculed  as  a  silly  fancy,  or  denounced  as  an  utter  falsehood. 
Their  real  occurrence,  however,  would  have  been  a  sign  and  a  won- 
der too  striking  to  be  trifled  with ;  but  it  is  not  probable  that  when 
the  people  of  the  whole  land  had  grievously  committed  whoredom 
away  from  Jehovah  (chap,  i,  2)  their  moral  sense  would  have 
been  so  shocked  at  these  actions  of  a  prophet  as  many  modern 
critics  imagine. 

The  main  purport  and  scope  of  the  passage  may  be  indicated  as 
follows:  Hosea  is  commanded  to  marry  a  harlot  "because  the  land 
'  Notes  on  the  Minor  Prophets.     Dissertation  i,  p.  413.     New  York,  1866. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  377 

has  grievously  committed  whoredom  away  from  Jehovah."  The  adul- 
terous woman  would  thus  represent  idolatrous  Israel,  scope  of  pas- 
whose  sins  are  so  frequently  set  forth  under  this  figure,  ^^^e  indicated. 
No  particular  historical  period  is  indicated,  none  need  be  assumed. 
All  question  here  as  to  when  Jehovah  was  married  to  Israel,  or 
what  Israel  was  before,  and  what  after  such  marriage,  only  tends 
to  confuse  and  obscure  the  main  purport  of  this  Sci'ipture,  into 
which  a  consideration  of  such  questions  does  not  enter.  The  mar- 
riage of  the  prophet  to  a  harlot  was  a  striking  symbol  of  Jehovah's 
relation  to  a  people  to  whom  it  would  be  supposed  he  would  have 
utter  aversion.  Yet  of  that  people,  so  guilty  of  spiritual  adultery, 
will  Jehovah  beget  a  holy  seed,  and  the  three  symbolical  names, 
Jezreel,  Lo-ruhamah,  and  Lo-ammi,  denote  the  severe  measures, 
stated  in  the  passage  itself,  bj  which  the  redemption  of  Israel  must 
be  accomplished.  Jezreel  may  have  a  double  reference,  one  local, 
taken  from  the  well-known  valley  of  this  name  where  Jehu  wrought 
his  bloody  deeds  (2  Kings  x,  1-7);  the  other  etymological  (as  th-e 
word  denotes  "  God  sows,"  or,  "  God  will  sow "),  and  indicating 
that  the  very  judgments  by  v/hich  the  kingdom  of  the  house  of 
Israel  was  overthrown  were  a  sowing  of  the  seed  from  rpj,g  symbolical 
which  should  spring  a  regenerated  nation.  The  names  Names. 
Lo-ruhamah  and  Lo-ammi  symbolize  other  forms  of  judgment. 
By  his  unpitying  chastisements  (Lo-ruhamah)  and  the  utter  rejec- 
tion of  them  as  a  people  (Lo-ammi)  will  he  secure  the  redemption 
of  that  vast  multitude  mentioned  in  verses  10,  11,  and  chapter  ii,  1 
(Heb.  ii,  1-3),  whose  glory  and  triumph  will  give  new  significance 
to  the  "  day  of  Jezreel,"  and  change  the  name  of  Lo-ruhamah  to 
Ruliamah  (compassionated),  and  Lo-ammi  to  Ammi  (my  people). 
This  \iew  fully  harmonizes  with  the  language  of  chapter  ii,  22,  23, 
and  gives  a  unity  and  definiteness  to  the  whole  of  the  first  two 
chapters  of  Hosea.  The  .oracle  of  chapter  ii,  is,  accordingly,  to  be 
understood  as  Jehovah's  appeal  to  Israel.  It  is  addressed  to  the 
"children  of  whoredoms,"  who  are  called  on  to  plead  with  their 
mother  (ii,  2;  Heb.  ii,  4).  It  consists  of  complaint,  threatening, 
and  promises,  and  from  verse  14  on  to  the  end  of  the  chapter 
(Heb.,  verses  16-25)  indicates  the  process  by  which  Jehovah  will 
woo  and  marry  that  mother  of  profligate  children,  making  for  her 
"the  valley  of  Achor  as  a  door  of  hope"  (ver.   15),*  and  thereby 

'  Achor  ("liDy)  means  troiihler,  or  troubling,  and  is  here  used  in  allusion  to  the  events 

T 

recorded  in  Josh,  vii,  24-26.  In  the  valley  of  Aclior,  Achan  was  punished  for  his 
crimes,  and  the  ban  was  thereby  removed  from  Israel.  "Through  the  name  Achor 
this  valley  became  a  memorial  how  the  Lord  restores  his  favour  to  the  Church  after 
the  e-xpiation  of  the  guilt  by  the  punishment  of  the  transgressor.     And  this  divine 


378  PRINCIPLES   OF 

accomplisliing  her  redemption.  To  emphasize  this  most  wonderful 
prophecy  and  promise  the  marriage  of  Hosea  and  Gomer  served  as 
a  most  impressive  sign. 

The  third  chapter  of  Hosca  records  another  symbolical  action  of 
Hosea,  chap,  iii,  this  prophet,  by  which  it  is  shown,  in  another  form, 
another  Symbol-  ^        Jehovah  would  reform  and  regenerate  the  chil- 

ical     act     with  i  ■         t    i 

similar  purport,  dren  of  Israel.  Who  this  adulterous  woman  beloved 
by  a  friend  (ver.  1)  was,  we  are  not  told,  and  conjectures  are  idle. 
The  supposition  of  many,  that  she  was  identical  wnth  Gomer,  has  no 
valid  foundation,  and  has  many  considerations  against  it.  If  Gomer 
were  intended,  she  would  hardly  bo  designated  merely  as  "  a  woman 
beloved  of  a  friend,"  nor  would  the  prophet  be  likely  to  have  pur- 
chased her  (ver.  2)  without  some  further  explanation.  In  the  long 
life  and  ministry  of  Hosea  (comp.  chap,  i,  1)  there  was  room  for 
several  events  of  this  kind,  and  we  most  naturally  assume  that  in 
the  meantime  his  former  wife,  Gomer,  had  died.  In  the  very  brief 
record  here  made  there  was  no  space  for  such  details.  Hosea's 
loving  this  woman,  buying  her  according  to  oriental  custom,  and 
placing  her  apart  for  many  days,  are  explained  as  a  symbol  of  Israel's 
exile  and  dispersion  until  the  appointed  time  of  restitution  should 
come.  All  that  is  here  said  about  Israel's  remaining  many  days 
without  king,  sacritices,  and  images  was  amply  fulfilled  during  the 
Assyrian  exile.  No  traces  of  idolatry  or  spiritual  whoredom  re- 
mained in  Israel  or  Judah  after  the  restoration  which  took  place 
under  Cyrus  and  his  successors.  The  reason  why  so  many  exposi- 
tors have  supposed  that  this  chapter  refers  to  another  and  later 
exile  arises  from  failure  to  note  the  habit  of  prophetic  discourse  to 
Repetition  of  I't'peat  the  same  things  under  different  symbols.  This 
symbols.  error  has  misled  many  into  the  notion  that  the  adul- 

terous woman  of  chapter  ii,  must  be  identified  with  the  Gomer 
of  chapter  i.  As  in  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  we  find  the  composite 
image  of  chapter  ii,  and  the  four  beasts  of  chapter  vii,  only  different 
symbols  of  the  same  events,  and  the  vision  of  the  ram  and  he-goat, 
in  chapter  viii,  going  over  a  part  of  the  same  ground  again,  so  here 
we  sliould  understand  that  Hosea,  at  different  periods  of  his  life, 
depicted  by  entii'ely  different  symbolic  actions  different  phases  of 

mode  of  procedure  will  be  repeated  in  all  its  essential  characteristics.  The  Lord 
will  make  tlic  valley  of  troubling  a  door  of  hope ;  that  is,  ho  will  so  expiate  the 
sins  of  his  Church  and  cover  them  with  his  grace,  that  the  covenant  of  fellowship 
with  him  will  no  more  be  rent  asunder  by  them;  or  he  will  so  display  his  grace  to 
the  sinners  that  compassion  will  manifest  itself  even  in  wrath,  and  through  judgment 
and  mercy  the  pardoned  sinners  will  be  more  and  more  firmly  and  inwardly  united  to 
him." — Kcil  ou  Ilosea,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  379 

the  same  great  facts.  Similar  repetition  abounds  in  Ezekiel,  Zecli- 
ariah,  and  the  Apocalypse  of  John. 

These  actions  of  Hosea,  then,  according  to  all  sound  laws  of 
grammatico-historical  interpretation,  are  to  be  understood  as  hav- 
ing actually  occurred  in  the  life  of  the  prophet,  and  are  to  be 
classed  along  with  other  actions  which  we  have  termed  symbolico- 
typical.  Such  actions,  as  we  have  observed  before,  combine  essen- 
tial elements  of  both  symbol  and  type,  and  serve  to  illustrate  at 
once  the  kinship  and  the  difference  between  them.  Serving  as  signs 
and  visible  images  of  unseen  facts  or  truths,  they  are  symbolical ; 
but  being  at  the  same  time  representative  actions  of  an  intelligent 
agent,  actually  and  outwardly  performed,  and  pointing  especially 
to  things  to  come,  they  are  typical.  Hence  the  propriety  of  desig- 
nating them  by  the  compound  name  symbolico-typical.  And  it  is 
worthy  of  note  that  every  instance  of  such  actions  is  accompanied 
by  an  explanation  of  its  import,  more  or  less  detailed. 

The  miracles  of  our  Lord  may  not  improperly  be  spoken  of  as 
symbolico-typical.  They  were  arnida  kol  ripara,  signs  q^j.  Lord's  mir- 
age? toonders,  and  they  all,  without  exception,  have  a  aciessymboiicai. 
moral  and  spiritual  significance.  The  cleansing  of  the  leper  symbol- 
ized the  power  of  ChrL-rt  to  heal  the  sinner,  and  so  all  his  miracles 
of  love  and  mercy  bear  the  character  of  redemptive  acts,  and  are 
typically  prophetical  of  what  he  is  evermore  doing  in  his  reign  of 
grace.  The  stilling  of  the  tempest,  the  walking  on  the  sea,  and  the 
opening  of  the  eyes  of  the  blind  furnish  suggestive  lessons  of  divine 
grace  and  power,  as  some  of  the  noblest  hymns  of  the  Church  at- 
test. The  miracle  of  the  water  made  wine,  says  Trench,  "  may  be 
taken  as  the  sign  and  symbol  of  all  which  Christ  is  evermore  doing 
in  the  world,  ennobling  all  that  he  touches,  making  saints  out  of 
sinners,  angels  out  of  men,  and  in  the  end  heaven  out  of  earth,  a 
new  paradise  of  God  out  of  the  old  wilderness  of  the  world."  ^ 
Hengstenberg  observes  that  Jesus'  triumphal  entry  into  Jerusa- 
lem, as  predicted  in  Zech.  ix,  10,  "was  a  symbolical  action,  the 
design  and  purport  of  which  were  to  assert  his  royal  dignity, 
and  to  set  forth  in  a  living  picture  the  true  nature  of  his  person 
and  kingdom,  in  opposition  to  the  false  notions  of  both  friends  and 
foes.  Apart,  therefore,  from  the  prophecy,  the  entry  had  its  own 
peculiar  meaning,  as,  in  fact,  was  the  case  with  every  act  of  Christ 
and  every  event  of  his  life."" 

'  Notes  on  the  Miracles  of  our  Lord,  p.  98.     New  York,  1858. 
2  Christology  of  the  Old  Testament,  vol.  iii,  p.  3V6.     Edinb.,  1863. 


380  PRINCIPLES   OF 


CHAPTER  XIX, 

SYMBOLIC   NUMBERS,   NAMES,   AND   COLOURS. 

Evert  observant  reader  of  the  Bible  has  had  his  attention  arrested 
at  times  by  what  seemed  a  mystical  or  symbolical  use  of  numbers. 
The  numbers  three,  four,  seven,  ten,  and  twelve,  especially,  have  a 
significance  worthy  of  most  careful  study.  Certain  well-knowTi 
proper  names,  as  Egypt,  Assyria,  and  Babylon,  are  also  used  in  a 
mystic  sense,  and  the  colours  red,  black,  and  white  are  understood 
to  be  so  associated  Avith  the  ideas  respectively  of  bloodshed,  evil, 
and  purity  as  to  have  become  emblematic  of  those  ideas.  The  only- 
Process  of  as-  valid  method  of  ascertaining  the  symbolical  meaning 
boi^m  orNum-  ^^^^  usage  of  such  numbers,  names,  and  colours  in  the 
i3ers,  etc.  Scriptures,  is  by  an  ample  collation  and  study  of  the 

passages  where  they  occur.  The  hermeneutical  process  is  therefore 
essentially  the  same  as  that  by  which  we  ascertain  the  usus  loquendi 
of  words,  and  the  province  of  hermeneutics  is,  not  to  furnish  an 
elaborate  discussion  of  the  subject,  but  to  exhibit  the  principles 
and  methods  by  which  such  a  discussion  should  be  carried  out. 


1 


Symbolical  Numbers. 

The  number  one,  as  being  the  first,  the  startingpoint,  the  parent, 
and  source  of  all  numbers,  the  representative  of  unity,  might  natu- 
rally be  supposed  to  possess  some  mystical  significance,  and  yet  there 
appears  no  evidence  that  it  is  ever  used  in  any  such  sense  in  the 
Scriptures.  It  has  a  notable  emphasis  in  that  watchword  of  Israel- 
itish  faith,  "Hear,  O  Israel,  Jehovah  our  God  is  one  Jehovah" 
(Deut.  vi,  4;  comp.  Mark  xii,  29,  32;  1  Cor.  viii,  4),  but  neither 
here  nor  elsewhere  is  the  number  used  in  any  other  than  its  literal 

'  On  the  symbolism  of  numbers  see  Billir,  Symbolik  des  mosaisehen  Cultus,  vol.  i, 
(1874),  pp.  185-282;  Kurtz,  Ueber  die  symbolische  Dif,'nitat  der  Zahlen  an  dor  Stifts- 
hiitte,  in  the  Studien  und  Kritiken  for  1844,  pp.  315-370;  Lammert,  Zur  Revision 
der  biblischcn  Zahlcnsymbolik,  in  the  Jahrbiichei  fiir  dcutschc  Theologie  for  1864, 
pp.  1-49 ;  and  Engelhardt,  Einiges  iiber  symbolisohc  Zahlen,  in  the  same  periodical 
for  1866,  pp.  301-332;  Kliefoth,  Die  Zahlensymbolik  der  heiligen  Schrift,  in  Dieck- 
hoff  und  Kliefoth's  Tiieolo<,nsche  Zeitsdirift  for  1802,  pp.  1-80,  341-453,  and  509- 
623;  Stuart'.'J  E.xcursus  (appropriatin<^  lar};ely  from  Bahr)  on  the  Symbolical  Use  of 
Numbers  in  the  Apocalypse,  in  his  Commentary  on  the  Apocalypse,  vol.  ii,  pp.  409- 
434;  White,  Symbolical  Numbers  of  Scripture  (Edinb.,  1808). 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  381 

sense.  The  number  three,  however,  is  employed  in  such  relations  na 
to  suggest  that  it  is  especially  the  number  of  divine  full-  Tije  number 
ness  in  unity,  Bahr  seems  altogether  too  fanciful  when  Three, 
he  says  :  "  It  lies  in  the  very  nature  of  the  number  three,  that 
is,  in  its  relation  to  the  two  preceding  numbers  one  and  two,  that  it 
forms  in  the  progression  of  numbers  the  first  conclusion  (Abschluss) ; 
for  the  one  is  first  made  a  number  by  being  followed  by  the  two, 
but  the  two  as  such  represents  separation,  difference,  contrast,  and 
this  becomes  cancelled  by  the  number  three,  so  that  three  is  in  fact 
the  first  finished,  true,  and  complete  unity." '  But  he  goes  on  to  say 
that  every  true  unity  comprises  a  trinity,  and  instances  the  familiar 
triads,  beginning,  middle,  and  end;  past,  present,  and  future;  un- 
der, midst,  and  upper ;  and  he  cites  from  many  heathen  sources  to 
show  the  mystic  significance  that  everywhere  attached  to  the  num- 
ber three.  He  also  cites  from  the  Scripture  such  triads  as  the  three 
men  who  appeared  to  Abraham  (Gen.  xviii,  2),  the  three  forefathers 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  (Exod.  iii,  6), 
the  three  sons  of  Noah,  by  whom  the  postdiluvian  world  was  peo- 
pled (Gen.  ix,  19),  the  three  constituent  parts  of  the  universe,  heav- 
en, earth,  and  sea  (Exod.  xx,  11;  Psa.  cxlvi,  6),  the  cedar  wood, 
scarlet,  and  hyssop,  used  in  the  ceremonial  purification  (Lev.  xiv,  6 ; 
Num.  xix,  6),  the  threefold  cord  that  is  not  quickly  broken  (Eccl. 
iv,  12),  and  other  less  noticeable  examples.  More  important  and 
conspicuous,  however,  as  exhibiting  a  sacredness  in  the  number 
three,  are  those  texts  which  associate  it  immediately  with  the  divine 
name.  These  are  the  thrice-repeated  benediction  of  Num.  vi,  24-26, 
or  threefold  putting  the  name  of  Jehovah  (ver.  2  7)  upon  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel ;  the  threefold  name  in  the  formula  of  baptism  (Matt, 
xxviii,  19),  and  the  apostolic  benediction  (2  Cor.  xiii,  14);  and  the 
trisagion  of  Isa.  vi,  3,  and  Rev.  iv,  8,  accompanied  in  the  latter 
l)assage  by  the  three  divine  titles.  Lord,  God,  and  Almighty,  and 
the  additional  words  "who  was,  and  who  is,  and  who  is  to  come." 
From  all  this  it  would  appear,  as  Stuart''  has  observed,  "that  the 
doctrine  of  a  Trinity  in  the  Godhead  lies  much  deeper  than  the  New- 
Platonic  philosophy,  to  which  so  many  have  been  accustomed  to  refer 
it.  An  original  impression  of  the  character  in  question  plainly  over- 
spread all  the  ancient  oriental  world  .  .  .  That  many  philosophistic 
and  superstitious  conceits  have  been  mixed  with  it,  in  process  of 
time,  proves  nothing  against  the  general  fact  as  stated.  And  this 
being  admitted,  we  cease  to  think  it  strange  that  such  distinction  and 
significancy  have  been  given  in  the  Scriptures  to  the  number  three." 

'  Symbolik  des  mosaischen  Cultus,  p.  205. 

*  Commentary  on  Apocalypse,  vol.  ii,  pp.  419,  420. 


333  PRINCIPLES    OF 

If  its  peculiar  usage  in  coimexion  with  the  divine  Name  gives 
mystical   significance  to  the   number  three,  and  entitles  it  to  be 
called  "  the  number  of  God,"  the  use  of  the  number  four 
in  the  Scriptures  would  in  like  manner  entitle  it  to  be 
called  "  the  number  of  the  world,"  or  of  the  visible  creation.     Thus 
we  have  the  four  winds  of  heaven  (Jer.  xlix,  36 ;  Ezek.  xxxvii,  9 
Dan.  vii,  2  ;  viii,  8 ;  Zech,  ii,  G  ;  vi,  5  ;  Matt,  xxiv,  31 ;  Mark  xiii,  27 
Rev.  vii,  1),  the  four  corners  or  extremities  of  the  earth  (Isa.  xi,  12 
Ezek.  vii,  2 ;  Rev.  vii,  1  ;  xx,  8),  corresponding,  doubtless,  with  the 
four  points  of  the  compass,  east,  west,  north,  and  south  (1  Chron. 
ix,  24 ;  Psa.  cvii,  3 ;  Luke  xiii,  29),  and  the  four  seasons.     Notice- 
able also  are  the  four  living  creatures  in  Ezek.  i,  5,  each  with  four 
faces,  four  Avings,  four  hands,  and  connected  with  four  wheels ;  and 
in  Zechariah  the  four  horns  (i,  18),  the  four  smiths  (i,  20),  and  the 
four  chariots  (vi,  1). 

The  number  se\  en,  being  the  sum  of  four  and  three,  may  natural- 
Iv  be  sui  (posed  to  svmbolize  some  mystical  union  of  God 

Seven.  .11  J  J 

with  the  world,  and  accordingly,  may  be  called  the  sacred 
number  of  the  covenant  between  God  and  his  creation.  The  heb- 
domad, or  period  of  seven  days,  is  so  essentially  associated  with  the 
record  of  creation  (Gen.  ii,  2,  3;  Exod.  xx,  8-11),  that  from  the 
beginning  a  sevenfold  division  of  time  was  recognized  among  the 
ancient  nations.  In  the  Scripture  it  is  peculiarly  a  ritual  number. 
In  establishing  his  covenant  with  Abraham  God  ordained  that  seven 
days  must  pass  after  the  birth  of  a  child,  and  then,  upon  the  eighth 
day,  he  must  be  circumcised  (Gen.  xvii,  12;  comp.  Lev.  xii,  2,  3). 
The  passover  feast  continued  seven  days  (Exod.  xii,  15).  The  feast 
of  Pentecost  was  held  seven  weeks  after  the  day  of  the  wave  offer- 
ing (Lev.  xxiii,  15).  The  feast  of  trumpets  occui-red  in  the  seventh 
month  (Lev.  xxiii,  24),  and  seven  times  seven  years  brought  round 
the  year  of  jubilee  (Lev.  xxv,  8).  The  blood  of  the  sin  offering  was 
sprinkled  seven  times  before  the  Lord  (Lev.  iv,  6).  The  ceremonial 
cleansing  of  the  leper  required  that  he  be  sprinkled  seven  times 
witli  blood  and  seven  times  with  oil,  that  he  tarry  abroad  outside 
of  his  tent  seven  days  (Lev.  xiv.  7,  8;  xvi,  27),  and  that  his  house 
also  be  sjjrinkled  seven  times  (Lev.  xiv,  51).  Contact  with  a  dead 
body  and  other  kinds  of  ceremonial  uncleanness  required  a  purifi- 
cation of  seven  days  (Num.  xix,  11 ;  Lev,  xv,  13,  24).  And  so  the 
idea  of  covenant  relations  and  obligations  seems  to  be  associated 
Avith  this  sacred  number.  Jehovah  confirmed  his  word  to  Joshua 
and  Israel,  when  for  seven  days  «even  priests  with  seven  trumpets 
compassed  Jericho,  and  on  the  seventh  day  compassed  the  city 
seven  times  (Josh,  vi,  13-15).     The  golden  candlestick  liad  seven 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  383 

lamps  (Exod.  xxxviii,  23),  The  seven  churches,  seven  stars,  seven 
seals,  seven  trumpets,  seven  thunders,  and  seven  last  plagues  of  the 
Apocalypse  are  of  similar  mystical  significance. 

The  number  ten  completes  the  list  of  primary  numbers,  and  is 
made  the  basis  of  all  further  numeration.  Hence,  it  is 
naturally  regarded  as  the  number  of  rounded  fulness 
or  completeness.  The  Hebrew  word  for  ten,  "ib^y,  is  believed  to 
favour  this  idea.  Gesenius  (Lex.)  traces  it  to  a  root  which  conveys 
the  idea  of  covjunctlon.,  and  observes  that  "etymologists  a^n-ee  in 
deriving  this  form  from  the  conjunction  of  the  ten  fingers."  F first 
adopts  the  same  fimdaraental  idea,  and  defines  the  word  as  if  it 
were  expressive  of  ^^ union,  association;  hence  multitude,  heap,  mul- 
tiplicity'''' (Heb.  Lex).  And  this  general  idea  is  sustained  by  the 
usage  of  the  number.  Thus  the  Decalogue,  the  totality  and  sub- 
stance of  the  whole  Torah,  or  Law,  is  spoken  of  as  the  ten  loords 
Exod.  xxxiA^,  28;  Deut.  iv,  13;  x,  4);  ten  elders  constitute  an  an- 
cient Israelitish  court  (Ruth  iv,  2) ;  ten  princes  represent  the  tribes 
of  Israel  (Josh,  xxii,  14);  ten  virgins  go  forth  to  meet  the  bride- 
groom (Matt.  XXV,  1).  And,  in  a  more  general  way,  ten  times  is 
equivalent  to  many  times  (Gen.  xxxi,  7,  41;  Job  xix,  3),  ten  wom- 
en means  many  women  (Lev.  xxvi,  26),  ten  sons  many  sons  (1  Sam. 
i,  8),  ten  mighty  ones  are  many  mighty  ones  (Eccles.  vii,  19),  and 
the  ten  horns  of  Dan.  vii,  V,  24;  Rev.  xii,  3;  xiii,  1;  xvii,  12,  may 
fittingly  symbolize  many  kings.' 

The  symbolical  use  of  the  number  twelve  in  Scripture  appears 
to  have  fundamental  allusion  to  the  twelve  tribes  of 
Israel.  Thus  Moses  erects  "twelve  pillars  according 
to  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel "  (Exod.  xxiv,  4),  and  there  were 
twelve  stones  in  the  breastplate  of  the  high  priest  (Exod,  xxviii,  21), 
twelve  cakes  of  showbread  (Lev.  xxiv,  5),  twelve  bullocks,  twelve 
rams,  twelve  lambs,  and  twelve  kids  for  offerings  of  dedication 
(Num.  vii,  87),  and  many  other  like  instances.  In  the  New  Testa- 
ment we  have  the  twelve  apostles,  twelve  times  twelve  thousand 
are  sealed  out  of  the  tribes  of  Israel,  twelve  thousand  from  each 
tribe  (Rev.  vii,  4-8),  and  the  New  Jerusalem  has  twelve  gates, 
bearing  the  names  of  the  twelve  tribes,  and  guarded  by  twelve  an- 
gels (Rev.  xxi,  12),  and  its  wall  has  twelve  foundations,  bearing 
the  twelve  names  of  the  apostles  (xxi,  14).  Twelve,  then,  may 
properly  be  called  the  mystical  number  of  God's  chosen  people. 

It  is  thus  by  collation  and  comparison  of  the  peculiar  uses  of  these 
numbers   that  we   can  arrive   at  any   safe  conclusion  as  to  their 

'  Compare  Wemyss,  Clavis  Symbolica,  under  the  word  Ten,  and  Bahr,  Symbolik, 
vol.  i,  pp.  223,  224. 


384  PRINCIPLES   OF 

symbolical  import.  But  allowing  that  they  have  such  import  as  the 
Symbolical  does  foregoing  examples  indicate,  we  must  not  suppose  that 
not  always  ex-  fj^gy  tliercby  necessarily  lose  their  literal  and  proper 
sense.  meaning.     The  number  ten,  as  shown  above,  and  some 

few  instances  of  the  number  seven  (Psa.  xii,  6;  Ixxix,  12;  Prov. 
xxvi,  16;  Isa.  iv,  4;  Dan.  iv,  16),  authorize  us  to  say  that  they  are 
used  sometimes  indefinitely  in  the  sense  of  inany.  But  when,  for 
example,  it  is  written  that  seven  priests,  with  seven  trumpets,  com- 
passed Jericho  on  the  seventh  day  seven  times  (Josh,  vi,  13-15),  we 
understand  the  statements  in  their  literal  sense.  These  things 
were  done  just  so  many  times,  but  the  symbolism  of  the  sevens 
suggests  that  in  this  signal  overthrow  of  Jericho  God  was  confirm- 
ing his  covenant  and  promises  to  give  into  the  hand  of  his  chosen 
people  their  enemies  and  the  land  they  occupied  (comp.  Exod. 
xxiii,  31 ;  Josh,  ii,  9,  24;  vi,  2).  And  so  the  sounding  of  the  seven 
trumpets  of  the  Apocalypse  completed  the  mystery  of  God  as  de- 
clared to  his  prophets  (Rev.  x,  7),  so  that  when  the  seventh  angel 
sounded  great  voices  in  heaven  said:  "The  kingdom  of  the  world 
is  become  that  of  our  Lord  and  of  his  Christ,  and  he  shall  reign 
forever  and  ever"  (Rev.  xii,  15). 

The  "  time  and  times  and  dividing  (or  half)  of  a  time  "  (Dan.  vii, 
Time,  times,  25;  xii,  V;  Rev.  xii,  13)  is  commonly  and  with  reason 
and  half  atime.  believed  to  Stand  for  three  years  and  a  half,  a  time  de- 
noting a  year.  A  comparison  of  verses  6  and  12  of  Rev.  xii  shows 
this  period  to  be  the  same  as  twelve  hundred  and  sixty  days,  or  ex- 
actly three  and  a  half  years,  reckoning  three  hundred  and  sixty 
days  to  a  year.  But  as  this  number  is  in  every  case  used  to 
denote  a  period  of  woe  and  disaster  to  the  Church  or  people  of 
God  (Kev.  xi,  2),  we  may  regard  it  as  symbolical.  It  is  a  divided 
seven  (comp.  Dan.  ix,  27)  as  if  suggesting  the  thought  of  a  broken 
covenant,  an  interrupted  sacrifice,  a  triumph  of  the  enemy  of  God. 

The  twelve  hundred  and  sixty  days  are  also  equivalent  to  forty- 
Fbrty-two  two  months  (Rev.  xi,  2,  3;  xiii,  5),  reckoning  thirty 
months.  j^yg  to  a  month,  and,  thus  used,  it  is  probably  to  be 

regarded,  not  as  an  exact  designation  of  just  so  many  days,  but  as 
a  round  number  readily  reckoned  and  remembered,  and  approxi- 
mating the  exact  length  of  the  period  denoted  with  sufficient  near- 
ness. In  Dan.  viii,  14  we  have  the  peculiar  expression  "two  thou- 
sand and  three  hundred  evening  mornings,"  which  some  explain  as 
meaning  so  many  days,  in  allusion  to  Gen.  i,  5,  where  evening  and 
morning  constitute  one  day.  Others,  however,  understand  so  many 
morning  and  evening  sacrifices,  which  would  require  half  the  num- 
ber of   days   (eleven  hundred  and  fifty).     Perhaps,  however,  the 


BIBLICAL   IlERMENEUTICS.  385 

word  D^3?N!,  tioo  thousand,  should  be  pointed  D"'Q^^5,  one  thousand, 
then  we  would  have  thirteen  hundred  days  of  evening  and  morning. 
This  closely  approximates  the  twelve  hundred  and  ninety  days  of 
Dan.  xii,  11,  which,  when  compared  with  the  thirteen  hundred  and 
thirty-five  days  mentioned  in  the  next  verse,  seems  rather  to  show 
that  in  the  peculiarly  exact  designations  of  time  here  recorded  we 
have  not  mystical  or  symbolical  numbers,  but  literal  designations 
of  the  length  of  important  periods. 

The  number  forty  designates  in  so  many  places  the  duration  of  a 
penal  judgment,  either  forty  days  or  forty  years,  that 
it  may  be  regarded  as  symbolic  of  a  period  of  judg- 
ment. The  forty  days  of  the  flood  (Gen.  vii,  4,  12,  IV),  the  forty 
years  of  Israel's  wandering  in  the  wilderness  (Num.  xiv,  34),  the 
forty  stripes  with  which  a  convicted  criminal  was  to  be  beaten 
(Deut.  XXV,  3),  the  forty  years  of  Egypt's  desolation  (Ezek.  xxix, 
11,  12),  and  the  forty  days  and  nights  during  which  Moses,  Elijah, 
and  Jesus  fasted  (Exod.  xxiv,  28;  1  Kings  xix,  8;  Matt,  iv,  2),  all 
favour  this  idea.  But  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  in  all 
these  cases  the  number  forty  is  not  also  used  in  its  jDroper  and  lit- 
eral sense.  The  symbolism,  if  any,  arises  from  the  association  of 
the  number  with  a  period  of  punishment  or  trial. 

The  number  seventy  is  also  noticeable  as  being  that  of  the  total- 
ity of  Jacob's  sons  (Gen.  xlvi,  27:  Exod.  i,  5;  Deut. 

7  7  7       7  SeventY. 

x,  22)  and  of  the  elders  of  Israel  (Exod.  xxiv,  1,  9; 
Num.  xi,  24) ;  the  Jews  were  doomed  to  seventy  years  of  Babylo- 
nian exile  (Jer.  xxv,  11,  12;  Dan.  ix,  2);  seventy  weeks  distinguish 
one  of  Daniel's  most  important  prophecies  (Dan.  ix,  24),  and  our 
Lord  appointed  seventy  other  disciples  besides  the  twelve  (Luke 
X,  1).  Auberlen  observes:  "The  number  seventy  is  ten  multiplied 
by  seven ;  the  human  is  here  moulded  and  fixed  by  the  divine. 
For  this  reason  the  seventy  years  of  exile  are  a  symbolical  sign  of 
the  time  during  which  the  power  of  the  world  would,  according  to 
God's  will,  triumph  over  Israel,  during  which  it  would  execute  the 
divine  judgments  on  God's  people."  ^ 

We  have  already  seen  (p.  370),  in  discussing  the  symbolical  ac- 
tions of  Ezekiel,  that  the  four  hundred  and  thirty  days   „     ,  ,.    ^ 

_  '  _  .         .  Prophetic  des- 

of  his  prostration  formed  a  symbolical  period  in  allu-   ignations      cf 

sion  to  the  four  hundred  and  thirty  (390+40)  years  of  *''°^' 

the  Egyptian  bondage   (Exod.  xii,  40).     Like   the  number  forty, 

as  shown  above,  it  was  associated  with  a  period  of  discipline  and 

sorrow.     Each  day  of  ihe  prophet's  prostration  represented  a  year 

of  Israel's  humiliation  and  judgment  (Ezek.  iv,  6),  as  the  forty  days 

'  The  Prophecies  of  Daniel  and  the  Revelation,  Eng.  Trans.,  p.  134.     Edinb.,  1856. 
25 


386  PRINCIPLES   OF 

during  which  the  spies  searched  the  Lmd  of  Canaan  were  typical 
of  the  years  of  Israel's  wandering  and  wasting  in  the  wilderness 
(Num.  xiv,  33,  34). 

Here  it  is  in  place  to  examine  the  so-called  "year-day  theory" 
Tiie  year-day  ^f  prophetic  interpretation,  so  prevalent  among  modern 
theory.  expositors.'     Upon  the  statement  of  the  two  passages 

just  cited  from  Numbers  and  Ezekiel,  and  also  upon  supposed  ne- 
cessities of  apocalyptic  interpretation,  a  large  number  of  modern 
writers  on  prophecy  have  advanced  the  theory  tliat  the  word  d<ty, 
or  dnys^  is  to  be  understood  in  prophetic  designations  of  time  as 
denoting  years.  This  theory  has  been  applied  especially  to  the 
"time,  times,  and  dividing  of  a  time"  in  Dan.  vii,  25,  xii,  7,  and 
Rev.  xii,  14;  the  twelve  hundred  and  sixty  days  of  Rev.  xi,  3;  xii,  6; 
and  also  by  many  to  the  two  thousand  three  hundred  days  of  Dan. 
viii,  14,  and  the  twelve  hundred  and  ninety  and  thirteen  hundred 
and  thirty-five  days  of  Dan.  xii,  11,  12.  The  forty  and  two  months 
of  Rev.  xi,  2,  and  xiii,  5,  are,  according  to  this  theory,  to  be  multi- 
plied by  thirty  (42X30=1260),  and  then  the  result  in  days  is  to  be 
understood  as  so  many  years.  After  the  like  manner,  the  time, 
times,  and  a  half,  are  first  understood  as  three  years  and  a  half,  and 
then  the  years  are  multiplied  by  three  hundred  and  sixty,  a  round 
number  for  the  days  of  a  year,  and  the  result  (1260)  is  undei'stood 
as  designating,  not  so  many  days,  but  so  many  years. 

If  this  is  a  correct  theory  of  interpreting  the  designations  of 
prophetic  time,  it  is  obvious  that  it  is  a  most  important 
reaching  and  one.  It  IS  necessarily  so  farreachmg  in  its  practical 
sTo^'uiTha^^e  ^'^'s^^ts  as  fundamentally  to  affect  one's  whole  plan  and 
most  valid  sup-  process  of  exposition.  Such  a  theory,  surely,  ought  to 
^""^ "  be  supported  by  the  most  convincing  and  incontrovert- 

ible reasons.  And  yet,  upon  the  most  careful  examination,  we  do 
not  find  that  it  has  any  sufficient  warrant  in  the  Scripture,  and  the 
expositions  of  its  advocates  are  not  of  a  character  likely  to  com- 
mend it  to  the  critical  mind.  Against  it  we  urge  the  five  follow- 
ing considerations: 

^1,  This  theory  derives  no  valid  support  from   the  passages  in 

Numbers  and  Kzekiel  already  referred  to.     In  Num. 

in  Num.  xiv  and  ^iv,  33,  34,  Jehovah's  word  to  Israel  simply  states  that 

Ezek.  iv.  they  must  suffer  for  their  iniquities  forty  years,  "  in  the 

'  See  on  this  subject  Stuart's  article  on  the  Designation  of  Time  in  tlie  Apocalypse 
in  the  American  IJiblical  Repository  for  Jan.,  1835.  Also  a  reply  to  the  same  by  Dr. 
Allen  in  the  same  periodical  for  July,  1840.  Compare  also  Cowles'  Dissertation  on  tl;e 
subject  at  the  end  of  his  Conmientary  on  Daniel.  Elliott's  laboured  argument  on  this 
subject  (Hone  Apocalyp!ie:r^,  vol.  iii,  p]).  200-208)  is  mainly  a  series  of  presumptions. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  387 

mimlier  of  the  days  which  ye  searched  the  land,  forty  days,  a  day 
for  the  year,  a  day  for  the  year."  There  is  no  possibility  of  mis- 
understanding this.  The  spies  were  absent  foi*ty  days  searching 
the  land  of  Canaan  (Num.  xiii,  25),  and  when  they  returned  they 
brought  back  a  bad  report  of  the  country,  and  spread  disaffection, 
murmuring,  and  rebellion  through  the  whole  congregation  of  Israel 
(xiv,  2-4).  •  Thereupon  the  divine  sentence  of  judgment  was  pro- 
nounced upon  that  generation,  and  they  were  condemned  to  "  graze 
(O'li"),  ixistiire,  feed)  in  the  wilderness  forty  years"  (xiv,  33).  Here 
then  is  certainly  no  ground  on  which  to  base  the  universal  prop- 
osition that,  in  prophetic  designations  of  time,  a  day  means  a  year. 
The  passage  is  exceptional  and  explicit,  and  the  words  are  used  in 
a  strictly  literal  sense;  the  days  evidently  mean  days,  and  the  years 
mean  years.  The  same  is  true  in  every  particular  of  the  days  and 
years  mentioned  in  Ezek.  iv,  5,  6.  The  days  of  his  prostration 
were  literal  days,  and  they  were  typical  of  yeai*s,  as  is  explicitly 
stated.  But  to  derive  from  this  symbolico-typical  action  of  Ezekiel 
a  hermeneutical  principle  or  law  of  universal  application,  namely, 
that  days  in  prophecy  mean  years,  would  be  a  most  unwarrantable 
procedure. 

;  2,  If  the  two  passages  now  noticed  were  expressive  of  a  universal 
law,  we  certainly  would  expect  to  find  it  sustained  and    ,,  ^      .  .    ^ 

'  .  •'     .  ^  Not  sustained 

capable  of  illustration  by  examples  of  fulfilled  prophecy,  by  Propiietic 
But  examples  bearing  on  this  point  are  overwhelmingly  °^  °^^" 
against  the  theory  in  question.  God's  word  to  Noah  was :  "  Yet 
seven  days,  I  will  cause  it  to  rain  upon  the  land  forty  days  and  forty 
nights"  (Gen.  vii,  4).  Did  any  one  ever  imagine  these  days  were 
symbolical  of  years?  Or  will  it  be  pretended  that  the  mention  of 
nights  along  with  days  removes  the  prophecy  from  the  category  of 
those  scriptures  which  have  a  mystical  import?  God's  word  to 
Abraham  was  that  his  seed  should  be  afflicted  in  a  foreign  land 
four  hundred  years  (Gen.  xv,  13).  Must  we  mx;ltiply  these  years 
by  three  hundred  and  sixty  to  know  the  real  time  intended  ?  Isaiah 
prophesied  that  Ephraim  should  be  broken  within  threescore  and 
five  years  (Isa.  vii,  8) ;  but  who  ever  dreamed  that  this  must  be  re- 
solved into  days  in  order  to  find  the  period  of  Ephraim's  fal]? 
Was  it  ever  sagely  believed  that  the  three  years  of  Moab's  glory, 
referred  to  in  Isa.  xvi,  14,  must  be  multiplied  by  three  hundred  and 
sixty  in  order  to  fi.nd  the  import  of  what  Jehovah  had  spoken  con- 
cerning it?  Was  it  by  such  mathematical  calculation  as  this  that 
Daniel  "understood  in  the  books  the  number  of  the  years,  which 
was  a  word  of  Jehovah  to  Jeremiah  (comp.  Jer.  xxv,  12)  the 
prophet,  to  complete  as  to  the  desolations  of  Jerusalem   seventy 


388  PRINCIPLES   OP 

years"  (Dan.  ix,  2)?  Or  is  it  supposable  that  the  seventy  years  of 
Jeremiah's  prophecy  were  ever  intended  to  be  manipulated  by  such 
calculations?  In  short,  this  theory  breaks  down  utterly  when  an 
appeal  is  taken  to  the  analogy  of  prophetic  scriptures.  If  the  time, 
times,  and  a  half  of  Dan.  vii,  25  means  three  and  a  half  years  mul- 
tiplied by  three  hundred  and  sixty,  that  is,  twelve  hundred  and 
sixty  years,  then  the  seven  times  of  Dan.  iv,  16,  32,  should  mean 
seven  times  three  hundred  and  sixty,  or  two  thousand  five  hun- 
dred and  twenty  years.  Or  if  in  one  prophecy  of  the  future, 
twelve  hundred  and  sixty  days  must,  without  any  accompanying 
qualification,  or  any  statement  to  that  effect  in  the  context,  be  un- 
derstood as  denoting  so  many  years,  then  the  advocates  of  such  a 
theory  must  show  pertinent  and  valid  reason  why  the  forty  days  of 
Jonah's  prophecy  against  Nineveh  (Jon.  iii,  4)  are  not  to  be  also 
understood  as  denoting  forty  years. 

3.  The  year-day  theory  is  thought  to  have  support  in  Daniel's 
Daniel's proph-  prophecy  of  the  seventy  iceeks  (Dan.  ix,  24-27).  But 
ecy  of  tn^sev-  ^T^^it  prophecy  says  not  a  word  about  days  or  years,  but 
parallel.  seventy  heptads^  or  sevens  (WVyy),     The  position  and 

gender  of  the  word  indicate  its  peculiar  significance.  It  nowhere 
else  occurs  in  the  masculine  except  in  Dan.  x,  2,  3,  where  it  is  ex- 
pressly defined  as  denoting  hei^tads  of  days  (D"'0^^  Q"'y2y').  Unaccom- 
panied by  any  such  limiting  word,  and  standing  in  such  an  emphatic 
position  at  the  beginning  of  ver.  24,  we  have  reason  to  infer  at  once 
that  it  involves  some  mystical  import.  When,  now,  we  observe 
that  it  is  a  Messianic  oracle,  granted  to  Daniel  when  his  mind  was 
full  of  meditations  upon  Jeremiah's  prophecy  of  the  seventy  years 
of  Jewish  exile  (ver.  2),  and  in  answer  to  his  ardent  supplications, 
we  most  naturally  understand  the  seventy  heptads  as  heptads  of 
years.  But  this  admission  furnishes  slender  support  to  such  a 
sweeping  theory  as  would  logically  bring  all  prophetic  designations 
of  time  to  the  principle  that  days  mean  years. 

4j  It  has  been  argued  that  in  such  passages  as  Judg.  xvii,  10; 

1  Sam.  ii,  19:   2  Chron.  xxi,  19,  and  Isa.  xxxii,  10,  the 
Days  nowhere  ,,.  -,  t  i.-ei-  j 

properly  mean   word  days  IS  used  to  denote  years,  and  "it  this  word 

^^■^^^-  be  sometimes  thus  used  in  Scripture  in  places  not  pro- 

phetic, why  should  it  not  be  thus  employed  in  proi^hetic  passages?"' 
But  a  critical  examination  of  those  passages  will  show  that  the  word 
for  days  is  not  really  used  in  the  sense  of  years.  In  Judg.  xvii,  10, 
Micah  says  to  the  Levite:  "Dwell  with  me,  and  be  to  me  for  a 
father  and  a  priest,  and  I  will  give  thee  ten  (pieces)  of  silver  for 

'  Sec  Allen's  artrcle  "  On  the  Designations  of  Time  in  Daniel  and  John,"  in  The 
ImericaQ  Biblictil  UeiJository,  for  July,  1840,  p.  39. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  £89 

the  days''"'  (D''P«p),  that  is,  for  the  days  that  he  should  dwell  with 
him  as  a  priest.  In  I  Sam.  ii,  19,  it  is  said  that  Samuel's  mother 
made  him  a  little  robe,  and  brought  it  up  to  him /row?  days  to  days 
in  her  going  up  along  with  her  husband  to  offer  the  sacrifice  of  the 
daysy  Here  the  reference  is  to  the  particular  days  of  going  up  to 
the  tabernacle  to  worship  and  sacrifice,  and  the  exact  sense  is  not 
brought  out  by  the  common  version,  "year  by  year"  or  "yearly." 
They  may  have  gone  up  several  times  during  the  year  at  the  days 
of  the  great  national  feasts.  And  this  appears  from  a  comparison 
of  1  Sara,  i,  3  and  7,  where,  in  the  first  place,  it  is  said  that  Elkanah 
went  ^x^  from  days  to  days,  and  in  ver.  7,  "so  he  did  year  by  year.''"' 
That  is,  he  went  up  three  times  a  year  according  to  the  law  (Exod. 
xxiii,  14-17)  "from  days  to  days,"  as  the  well-known  national 
feastdays  came  round;  and  his  wife  generally  accompanied  him. 
2  Chron.  xxi,  1 9  is  literally :  "  And  it  came  to  pass  at  days  from 
days  (i.  e.,  after  several  days),  and  about  the  time  of  the  going  out 
(expiration)  of  the  end,  at  two  days,  his  bowels  went  out,"  etc' 
Similarly,  Isa.  xxxii,  10 :  "  Days  above  a  year  shall  ye  be  troubled," 
etc.  That  is,  more  than  a  year  shall  ye  be  troubled."  The  most 
that  can  be  said  of  such  a  use  of  the  word  days,  is,  that  it  is  used 
indefinitely  in  a  proverbial  and  idiomatic  way ;  but  such  a  usage  by 
no  means  justifies  the  broad  i^roposition  that  a  day  means  a  year. 

/5.  The  advocates  of  the  year-day  theory  rest  their  strongest  argu- 
mrat,  however,  upon  the  necessity  of  such  a  theory  for  Disproved  by 
what  they  regard  the  true  explanation  of  certain  proph-  u^eg^j^^  j^ferl 
ecies.  They  affirm  that  the  three  times  and  a  half  of  pretation. 
Dan.  vii,  25,  and  the  twelve  hundred  and  sixty  days  of  Rev.  xii,  6, 
and  their  parallels,  are  incapable  of  a  literal  interpretation.  And 
so,  carrying  the  predictions  both  of  Daniel  and  John  down  into 
the  history  of  modern  Europe  for  explanation,  most  of  these 
writers  understand  the  twelve  hundred  and  sixty  year-days  as 
designating  the  period  of  the  Roman  Papacy.  Mr.  William  Mil- 
ler, famous  in  the  last  generation  for  the  sensation  he  produced, 
and  the  large  following  he  had,  adopted  a  scheme  of  interpreting 
not  only  the  twelve  hundred  and  sixty  days,  but  also  the  twelve 
hundred  and  ninety,  and  the  thirteen  hundred  and  thirty-five 
(of  Dan.  xii,  11,  12),  so  that  he  ascertained  and  published  with 
great  assurance  that  the  coming  of  Christ  would  take  place  in 
October,  1843.  We  have  lived  to  see  his  theories  thoroughly  ex- 
ploded, and  yet  there  have  not  been  wanting  others  who  have 
adopted  his  hermeneutical  principles,  and  named  A.  D.   1866  and 

'  See  Keil  and  Bertheau  on  Chronicles,  in  loco. 
^  See  Alexander  on  Isaiah,  in  loco. 


390  PRINCIPLES   OF 

A.  D.  1870  as  "the  time  of  the  end."  A  theory  which  is  so  desti- 
tute of  scriptural  analogy  and  support  as  we  have  seen  above,  and 
presumes  to  rest  on  such  a  slender  showing  of  divine  authority,  is 
on  those  grounds  alone  to  be  susj^ected;  but  when  it  has  again 
and  again  proved  to  be  false  and  misleading  in  its  application,  we 
may  safely  reject  it,  as  furnishing  no  valid  principle  or  rule  in  a 
true  science  of  herraeneutics,*  Those  who  have  supposed  it  to  be 
necessary  for  the  exposition  of  apocalyptic  prophecies,  should  be- 
gin to  feel  that  their  systems  of  interpretation  are  in  error. 

The  duration  of  the  thousand  years,  or  the  millenial  reign,  men- 
The  thousand  ^ioned  in  Rev.  XX,  2-7,  has  been  variously  estimated, 
years  of  Rev.  JMost  of  those  who  advocate  the  year-day  theory  have 
^^'  singularly  agreed  to  understand  this  thousand  years  lit- 

erally. With  them  days  mean  years,  and  times  mean  years,  to  be 
resolved  into  three  hundred  and  sixty  days  each,  but  the  thousand 
years  of  the  Apocalypse  are  literally  and  exactly  a  thousand  years  ! 
Many,  however,  understand  this  number  as  denoting  an  indefinitely 
long  period,  and  some  have  not  scrupled  to  apply  to  it  the  theory 
of  a  day  for  a  year,  and  multiplying  by  three  hundred  and  sixty, 
estimate  the  length  of  the  millenium  at  three  hundred  and  sixty 
thousand  years.  But  in  this  case  we  have  no  analogy,  no  real 
parallel,  in  other  parts  of  scripture.  Allen  himself  candidly  ad- 
mits that  "  there  is  nothing  in  the  customary  use  of  the  phrase  a 
thousand,  in  other  piaces,  which  Avill  determine  its  import  in  the 
Book  of  Revelation.  The  probability  of  its  being  used  there  defi- 
nitely or  indefinitely  must  be  determined  by  examining  the  place 
itself,  and  from  the  nature  of  the  case."^  This  is  a  very  safe  and 
proper  rule,  and  it  may  well  be  added  that,  as  we  have  found  the 
number  ten  to  symbolize  the  general  idea  of  fulness,  totality,  com- 
pleteness, so  not  improbably  the  number  one  thousand  may  stand 
as  the  symbolic  numuer  of  manifold  fulness,  the  rounded  seon  of 
Messianic  triumph,  (6  atwv  /ieAAwv),  during  which  he  shall  abolish 
all  rule  and  all  authority  and  power,  and  put  all  his  enemies  un- 
der his  feet  (1  Cor.  xv,  24,  25),  and  bring  in  the  fulness  {jb  ttXti- 
QUjia)  of  both  Jews  and  Gentiles  (Rom.  xi,  12,  25). 

'  it  may  be  said  that  Bengcl's  long-ago  exploded  theory  of  explaining;  apocalyptic 
d'.'signations  of  time  i.s  worthy  of  as  much  credence  as  this  more  popular  year-day 
tiieory.  In  his  Erkliirtcn  Olfenbarung  Johannis  (1740)  he  takes  the  mystic  number 
COG  (Rev.  xiii,  18)  for  his  startinirpoint,  and  dividing  it  by  42  months,  he  makes  a 
prophetic  month  cciual  15?  years.  His  jjrophetic  days  were  of  coirespunding  length, 
amoimting  to  about  half  a  year,  and  his  scheme  fixed  the  end  of  all  things  in  A.D.  1836. 
In  favour  of  Bengel  it  may  be  said  that  he  started  with  a  number  which  is  propound- 
ed as  a  riddle,  which  is  more  than  we  can  say  in  favour  of  these  other  theorists. 

*  American  Biblical  Repository,  July,  1840,  p.  47. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  391 


Symbolical  Names. 


A  symbolical  use  of  proper  names  is  apparent  in  such  passages  as 
Rev.  xi,  8,  where  the  great  city,  in  which  the  bodies  of  sodom  and 
the  slain  witnesses  were  exposed,  and  "  where  also  their  Egypt. 
Lord  was  crucified,"  is  called,  spiritually,'  Sodom  and  Egypt.  Evi- 
dently this  wicked  city,  whether  we  understand  Jerusalem  or  Rome, 
is  so  designated  because  its  moral  corruptions  and  bitter  persecut- 
ing spirit  were  like  those  of  Sodom  and  Egypt,  both  famous  in 
Jewish  history  for  these  ungodly  qualities.  In  a  similar  way  Isaiah 
likens  Judah  and  Jerusalem  to  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  (Isa.  i,  9,  10). 
Compare  also  Jer.  xxiii,  14.  In  Ezek,  xvi,  44-59,  the  abominations 
of  Jerusalem  are  made  to  appear  loathsome  by  comparison  and  con- 
trast with  Samaria  on  one  side  and  Sodom  on  the  other. 

In  like  manner  "  Babylon  the  great,"  is  evidently  a  symbolical 
name  in  Rev.  xiv,  8;  xvi,  19;  xvii,  5;  xviii,  2,  etc.  Babylon  and 
Whether  the  name  is  used  to  denote  the  same  city  as  Jerusalem. 
that  called  Sodom  and  Egypt  in  chapter  xi,  8,  or  some  other  city, 
its  mystical  designation  is  to  be  explained,  like  that  of  Sodom  and 
Egypt,  as  arising  from  Jewish  historical  associations  with  Babylon, 
the  great  city  of  the  exile.  That  city  could,  in  Jewish  thought,  be 
associated  only  with  oppression  and  woe,  and  their  antipathy  to  it 
as  a  persecuting  power  is  well  expressed  in  Psa.  cxxxvii.  The  op- 
posite of  Babylon,  the  Harlot,  in  the  Apocaly4)se,  is  Jerusalem,  the 
Bride  (Rev.  xxi,  9,  10).  So,  too,  in  the  psalm  just  referred  to,  the 
opposite  of  Babylon,  with  its  rivers  and  willows,  was  Jerusalem 
and  Mount  Zion.  And  the  careful  student  will  note  that,  as  one  of 
the  seven  angels  said  to  the  prophet,  "Come  hither,"  and  then 
"  carried  him  away  in  spirit  into  a  wilderness  "  and  showed  him  the 
mystic  Babylon,  the  Harlot  (Rev.  xvii,  1-3),  so  also  one  of  the 
same  class  of  angels  addressed  him  with  like  words,  and  then  "  car- 
ried him  away  in  spirit  into  a  mountain  great  and  high,"  and  showed 
him  the  holy  Jerusalem,  the  Bride  (chap,  xxi,  9,  10).  And  if  the 
Bride  denotes  the  true  Church  of  the  people  and  saints  of  the  Most 
High,  doubtless  the  Harlot  represents  the  false  and  apostate  Church, 
historically  guilty  of  the  blood  of  saints  and  martyrs.  Which  great 
city  best  represents  that  harlot — Rome,  which  truly  has  been  a  bitter 
persecutor,  or  Jerusalem,  so  often  called  a  harlot  by  the  prophets, 
and  charged  by  Jesus  himself  as  guilty  of  "all  the  righteous  blood 
poured  out  upon  the  land,  from  the  blood  of  Abel,  the  righteous, 

'  TlvEvnaTiKuc,  i.  e.,  by  a  mental  discernment  intensified  and  exalted  by  a  divine  in- 
rpiration  which  enables  one  to  see  things  according  to  their  real  and  spiritual 
nature. 


392  PRINCIPLES   OF 

unto  the  blood  of  Zachariab,  son  of  Barachiah"  (Matt,  xxiii,  35) — 
where  also  their  Lord  and  ours  was  crucified — each  expositor  will 
determine  for  himself. 

The  name  of  Egypt  is  used  symbolically  in  Hos.  viii,  13,  where 
Ephraim  is  sentenced,  on  account  of  sin,  to  "  return  to 
Egypt."  The  name  had  become  proverbial  as  the  land 
of  bondage  (Exod.  xx,  2),  and  Moses  had  threatened  such  a  return 
in  his  warnings  and  admonitions  addressed  to  Israel  (Deut.  xxviii, 
68).  In  Hos.  ix,  3,  this  return  to  Egypt  is,  by  the  Hebrew  poetic 
parallelism  of  the  passage,  made  equivalent  to  eating  unclean 
things  in  the  land  of  Asshur.  Hence  the  Assyrian  exile  is  viewed 
as  another  Egyptian  bondage. 

The  names  of  David  and  Elijah  are  used  after  the  same  sym- 
Davtd  and  Eli-  bolical  manner  to  designate,  prophetically,  the  prince 
^^-  Messiah  and  the  prophet  John  the  Baptist.     In  Ezek. 

xxxiv,  23,  24,  Jehovah  declares  that  he  will  set  his  servant 
David  for  a  shepherd  over  his  people,  and  for  a  prince  among 
them.  Here,  assuredly,  the  language  cannot  be  taken  literally, 
and  no  one  will  contend  that  the  historical  David  is  to  ajipear 
again  in  fulfilment  of  this  prediction.  Compare  Ezek.  xxxvii,  24; 
Jer.  XXX,  9;  Hos.  iii,  5.  So,  too,  the  prophecy  of  the  coming  of 
Elijah  in  Mai.  iv,  5,  was  fulfilled  in  John  the  Baptist  (Matt,  xi,  14; 
xvii,  10-13). 

The  name  Ariel  is  used  in  Isa.  xxix,  1,  2,  7,  as  a  symbolical  des- 

^^gj  ignation  of  Jerusalem,  but  its  mystical  import  is  quite 

uncertain.  The  word,  according  to  Gescnius,'  may  de- 
note either  lion  of  God,  or  altar  of  God ;  but  whether  it  should  be 
understood  as  denoting  the  city  of  lion-like  heroes,  or  of  invincible 
strength,  or  as  the  city  of  the  altar  place,  it  is  impossible  to  de- 
termine. Fuerst  thinks  (Ileb.  Lex.),  in  view  of  Isa.  xxxi,  9,  "where 
Jerusalem  is  celebrated  as  a  sacred  hearth  of  the  everlasting  fire,  it 
is  more  advisable  to  choose  this  signification." 

A  hostile,  oppressive  world-power  is  designated  in  Isa.  xxvii,  1, 
Leviathan,  the  as  "  Leviathan,  a  flying  serpent,  Leviathan,  a  crooked 
serpent.  serpent  ...  a  dragon    which   is    in   the    sea."      Some 

think  three  difl:"erent  hostile  powers  are  meant,  but  the  repetition  of 
the  name  Leviathan,  and  the  poetic  parallelism  of  the  passage,  arc 
against  that  view.  Egypt,  Assyria,  Babylon,  Media,  Persia,  and 
Rome  have  all  been  suggested  as  the  hostile  power  intended.  It 
is,  perhaps,  best  to  understand  it  generically  as  a  symbolic  name  for 
any  and  every  godless  world-power  that  sets  itself  up  as  an  oj^posex* 
and  oppressor  of  the  people  of  God. 

■  Commentar  iiber  den  Jesaia,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  393 


Symbolism  of  Colours. 


The  setting  of  the  rainbow  in  the  cloud  for  a  covenant  sign  be- 
tween God  and  the  land,  that  no  flood  of  waters  should  „  .  ^ 

'  Rainbow   and 

again  destroy  all  flesh  (Gen.  ix,  8-17)  would  naturally  tabernaciu  coi- 
associate  the  prominent  colours  of  that  bow  with  ideas  °^^' 
of  heavenly  grace.  In  the  construction  of  the  tabernacle  four  col- 
ours are  prominent,  blue,  purple,  scarlet,  and  white  (Exod.  xxv,  4; 
xxvi,  1,  31;  xxxv,  6,  etc.),  and  the  blending  of  these  in  the  cover- 
ings and  appurtenances  of  that  symbolic  structure  probably  served 
not  only  for  the  sake  of  beauty  and  variety,  but  also  to  suggest 
thoughts  of  heavenly  excellence  and  glory.  The  exact  colours, 
tints,  or  shades  denoted  by  the  Hebrew  Avords  translated  blue,  pur- 
ple, and  scarlet  (ri73ri,|05"iK,  and  ''JK'  ny^in),  it  is  hardly  possible  now 
to  determine  with  absolute  cei'tainty,'  but  probably  the  common 
version  is  sufticiently  correct. 

The  import  of  these  several  colours  is  to  be  gathered  from  the 
associations  in  which  they  appear.  Blue,  as  the  colour  j^pQ^  of  coi- 
of  the  heaven,  reflected  in  the  sea,  would  naturally  sug-  ours  to  be  in- 
gest that  which  is  heavenly,  holy,  and  divine.  Hence  their  associa^ 
it  was  appropriate  that  the  robe  of  the  ephod  was  made  *^°'^' 
wholly  of  blue  (Exod.  xxviii,  31;  xxxix,  22),  and  the  breastplate 
was  connected  with  it  by  blue  cords  (ver.  28),  It  was  also  by  a 
blue  cord  or  ribbon  that  the  golden  plate  inscribed 
"  Holiness  to  Jehovah "  was  attached  to  the  high 
priest's  mitre  (ver.  31).  The  loops  of  the  tabernacle  curtains  were 
of  this  colour  (Exod.  xxvi,  4),  and  the  children  of  Israel  were  com- 
manded to  place  blue  ribbons  as  badges  upon  the  borders  of  their 
garments  (Num.  xv,  37-41)  as  if  to  remind  them  that  they  were 
children  of  the  heavenly  King,  and  were  under  the  responsibility  of 
having  received  from  him  commandments  and  revelations.  Hence, 
too,  it  Avas  appropriate  that  a  blue  cloth  was  spread  over  the  holiest 
things  of  the  tabernacle  when  they  were  arranged  for  journeying 
forward  (Num.  iv,  0,  7,  11,  12). 

Purple  and  scarlet,  so  often  mentioned  in  connexion  with  the 
dress  of  kings,  have  very  naturally  been  regarded  as  purpie  and 
symbolical  of  royalty  and  majesty  (Judg.  viii,  26;  Esther  scarlet. 

*  See  Bahr's  section  on  the  Beschaffenheit  der  Farben  in  his  chapter  on  Die  Farben 
und  Bildwerke  der  Cultus-Statte,  Symbolik,  vol.  i  (new  ed.),  pp.  331-337.  See  also 
Atwater,  Sacred  Tabernacle  of  the  Hebrews,  pp.  209-224,  and  the  various  biblical  dic- 
tionaries and  cyclopjEdias,  under  the  word  Colours.  Josephus'  explanation  of  the  im- 
port of  these  colours  (Ant.,  iii,  7,  sec.  7)  is  more  fanciful  than  authoritative  or  satis- 
factory. 


394  PRINCIPLES   OF 

viii,  15;  Dan.  v,  7;  Nah.  ii,  3).  Both  these  colours,  along  with 
blue,  appeared  upon  the  curtains  of  the  tabernacle  (Exod.  xxvi,  1) 
and  upon  the  veil  that  separated  the  holy  place  from  the  most  holy 
(Exod.  xxvi,  31).  A  scarlet  cloth  covered  the  holy  vessels  which 
were  placed  upon  the  table  of  showbread,  and  a  purple  cloth  the 
altar  of  burnt  offerings  (Num.  iv,  8,  13). 

White  is,  pre-eminently,  the  colour  of  purity  and  righteousness. 
The  Hebrew  word  for  fine  linen,  or  byssus  (t^'K^),  of 
which  the  covering  and  veil  and  curtains  of  the  taber- 
nacle were  partly  made  (Exod.  xxvi,  1,  31,  36)  is  from  a  root  which 
signifies  tchiteiiess,  or  to  be  white.  It  was  also  largely  used  in  the 
vestments  of  the  high  priest  (Exod.  xxviii,  5,  6,  8,  15,  39).  Of 
kindred  signification  is  the  Hebrew  word  p3,  white  linen,  in  which 
the  Levitical  singers  were  arrayed  (2  Chron.  v,  12).  With  these 
white  garments  of  the  priests  and  Levites  (comp.  Psa.  cxxxii,  9) 
we  naturally  associate  the  raiment  "white  as  the  light"  in  which 
the  transfigured  Christ  appeared  (Matt,  xvii,  2;  Mark  ix,  3),  the 
apparel  of  the  angels  (Matt,  xxviii,  3;  John  xx,  12;  Acts  i,  10),  the 
white  robes  of  the  glorified  (Rev.  vii,  9),  and  the  fine  linen  bright 
and  pure,  symbolic  of  "  the  righteous  acts  of  the  saints  "  (Rev.  xix, 
8),  which  is  the  ornamental  vesture  of  the  wife  of  the  Lamb.  Also, 
as  characterizing  the  horses  of  victorious  warriors  (Zech.  i,  8;  vi, 
3;  Rev.  vi,  2;  xix,  11),  and  the  throne  of  judgment  (Rev.  xx,  11), 
white  may  represent  victorious  royalty  and  power. 

Black,  as  being  the  opposite  of  white,  would  easity  become  asso- 
ciated with  that  which  is  evil,  as  mourning  (Jer.  xiv,  2), 
pestilence,  and  famine  (Rev.  vi,  5,  6).  Red  is  naturally 
associated  with  war  and  bloodshed,  as  the  armour  of  the  armed 
warrior  is  suggestive  of  tumult  and  garments  rolled  in  blood  (Isa. 
ix,  5;  Nah.  ii,  3).  But  in  any  attempt  to  explain  the  symbolism 
of  a  particular  colour  the  interpreter  should  guard  against  pressing 
the  matter  to  an  unwarranted  extreme.  The  most  prudent  and 
learned  exegetes  have  reasonably  doubted  whether  the  different 
colours  of  the  horses  seen  in  Zechariah's  first  vision  (Zech.  i,  8) 
should  be  construed  as  having  each  a  definite  symbolical  signifi- 
cance. The  several  colours  of  the  curtains  of  the  tabernacle  ap- 
pear to  have  been  somewhat  promiscuously  blended  together 
(Exod.  xxvi,  1,  31),  and  when  thus  used  they  served  probably 
for  beauty  and  adornment  rather  than  for  separate  and  specific 
symbolical  import.  Only  as  an  interpreter  is  able  to  show  from 
parallel  usage,  analogy  and  inherent  propriety,  that  a  given  colour 
is  used  symbolically,  will  his  exposition  be  entitled  to  command 
assent. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  395 

The  same  thing,  substantially,  may  be  said  of  the  symbolical  im- 
port of  metals.  No  specific  significance  should  be  symbolical  im- 
sought  in  each  separate  metal  or  precious  stone,  for  any  Pp^of  thepre- 

o  _        ^  ...  .  cious  Metals 

attempt  to  point  out  such  significancy  is  apt  to  run  into  and  jewels. 
various  freaks  of  fancy.'  But  the  pure  gold  with  which  the  ark, 
mercyseat,  cherubim,  altar  of  incense,  table,  and  candlestick,  were 
either  overlaid  or  entirely  constructed  (Exod.  xxv),  might  very  ap- 
propriately symbolize  the  light  and  splendour  of  God  as  he  dwells 
in  his  holy  temple.  The  altar  of  burntofferings  was  overlaid  with 
brass  or  copper  (Exod.  xxvii,  2),  an  inferior  metal.  The  pillars  of 
the  court  were  also  made  of  this  material  (Exod.  xxvii,  10).  The 
sockets  of  the  tabernacle  boards,  and  the  hooks  and  joinings  of  the 
pillars,  were  of  silver  (Exod.  xxvi,  19;  xxvii,  10).  Outside  of  any 
attempt  to  trace  a  mystic  meaning  in  each  of  these  metals,  it  may 
be  enough  to  say,  in  general,  that  gold,  as  being  the  more  costly, 
would  appropriately  be  used  in  constructing  the  holiest  things  of 
the  inner  sanctuary.  Brass  would,  accordingly,  be  more  appropri- 
ate for  the  things  of  the  outer  court,  and  silver,  intermediate  be- 
tween the  two,  would  naturally  serve,  to  some  extent,  in  both.  The 
great  image  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream  combined  gold,  silver, 
brass,  iron,  and  clay  (Dan.  ii,  32,  33).  The  power,  strength,  and 
glory  of  the  Babylonian  monarchy,  as  represented  in  the  regal 
splendour  of  the  king,  Nebuchadnezzar,  was  represented  by  the 
golden  head  (verses  37  and  38).  The  silver  denoted  an  inferior 
kingdom.  The  iron  denoted,  esj)ecially,  the  strength  of  the  fourth 
kingdom,  "inasmuch  as  iron  breaks  in  pieces  and  crushes  every 
thing  "  (ver.  40).  So  the  different  metals  used  in  the  construction 
of  the  tabernacle  were  expressive  of  the  relative  sanctity  of  its 
different  parts.  The  twelve  precious  stones  in  the  high  priest's 
breastplate,  bearing  the  names  of  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel  (Exod. 
xxviii,  15-21),  and  the  twelve  foundations  of  Jerusalem  the  golden 
(Rev.  xxi,  14),  may  symbolize  God's  own  elect  as  his  precious  jew- 
els; but  an  effort  to  tell  which  tribe,  or  which  apostle,  was  desig- 
nated by  each  particular  jewel,  would  lead  the  interpreter  into 
unauthorized  speculations,  more  likely  to  bewilder  and  confuse  than 
to  furnish  any  valuable  lesson. 

'  See  the  third  chapter  of  Bahr's  Symbolik  (vol.  i,  New  ed.)  on  Das  Baumaterial  der 
Cultus-Stiitte,  pp.  283-330,  in  which  not  a  little  of  valuable  suggestion  is  presented 
along  with  much  that  is  too  fanciful  to  be  safely  accepted.  See  also  Atwater,  Sacred 
Tabernacle  of  the  Hebrews,  pp.  225-232. 


396  PRINCIPLES   OF 


CHAPTER  XX. 

DREAMS    AND    PROPHETIC    ECSTACY. 

In  an  intelligent  exposition  of  the  prophetic  portions  of  Holy  Scrip- 
Methods  of  di-  ture,  the  methods  and  forms  by  which  God  communi- 
vine revelation,  cated  supernatural  revelations  to  men  become  questions 
of  fundamental  importance.  Dreams,  night  visions,  and  states  of 
spiritual  ecstacy  are  mentioned  as  forms  and  conditions  under  which 
men  received  such  revelations.  In  Num.  xii,  6,  it  is  written:  "If 
there  be  a  prophet  among  you,  I,  Jehovah,  will  make  myself  known 
to  him  in  the  vision;  in  the  di-eam  will  I  speak  within  him.'"  The 
open  and  visible  manner  in  which  Jehovah  revealed  himself  to  Mo- 
ses is  then  (verses  7,  8)  contrasted  with  ordinary  visions,  showing 
that  Moses  was  honoured  above  all  prophets  in  the  intimacy  of  his 
communion  with  God.  The  appearance  (njpn,  form,  semblance, 
ver.  8)  of  Jehovah  which  Moses  was  permitted  to  behold  was  some 
thing  far  above  what  other  holy  seers  beheld  (comp.  Deut.  xxxiv, 
12).  This  appearance  "was  not  the  essential  nature  of  God,  his 
unveiled  glory,  for  this  no  mortal  man  can  see  (Exod.  xxxiii,  18), 
but  a  form  which  manifested  the  invisible  God  to  the  eye  of  man 
in  a  clearly  discernible  mode,  and  which  was  essentially  different^ 
not  only  from  the  visional  sight  of  God  in  the  form  of  a  man 
(Ezek.  i,  2G;  Dan.  vii,  9,  13),  but  also  from  the  appearances  of  God 
in  the  outward  world  of  the  senses  in  the  person  and  form  of  the 
angel  of  Jehovah,  and  stood  in  the  same  relation  to  these  two  forms 
of  revelation,  so  far  as  directness  and  clearness  were  concerned,  as 
the  sight  of  a  person  in  a  dream  to  that  of  the  actual  figure  of  the 
person  himself.  God  talked  with  Moses  without  figure,  in  the 
clear  distinctness  of  a  sj)iritual  communication,  whereas  to  the 
prophets  he  only  revealed  himself  through  the  medium  of  ecstacy 
or  dream.'"' 

The  dream  is  noticeably  prominent  among  the  earlier  forms  of 
The  Dreams  of  receiving  divine  revelations,  but  becomes  less  frequent 
Scripture.  ^^  ^  later  period.     The  most  remarkable  instances  of 

dreams  recorded  in  the  Scriptures  are  those  of  Abiraelech  (Gen.  xx, 

'i3)  wilhin  him,  not  unto  him,  as  the  common  version,  "/^t  fiim-,"  says  Kcil,"  in- 
asmuch as  a  revelation  in  a  dream  fell  within  the  inner  sphere  of  the  soul  life." — 
Commentary  on  the  Pentateuch,  in  loco.     Compare  Job  xxxiii,  14-17. 

'^  Keil's  Commentary  on  Num.  xii,  8. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  397 

3-7),  Jacob  at  Bethel  (xxviii,  12),  Laban  in  Mt.  Gilead  (xxxi,  24), 
Joseph  resjiecting  the  sheaves  and  the  luminaries  (xxxvii,  5-10),  the 
butler  and  the  baker  (xl,  5-19),  Pharaoh  (xli,  1-32),  the  Midianite 
(Judg.  vii,  13-15),  Solomon  (1  Kings  iii,  5;  ix,  2),  Nebuchadnezzar 
(Dan.  ii  and  iv),  Daniel  (Dan.  vii,  1),  Joseph  (JNlatt.  i,  20;  ii,  13,  19),' 
and  the  Magi  from  the  East  (Matt,  ii,  12).  The  "night  vision" 
appears  to  have  been  of  essentially  the  same  nature  as  the  dream 
(comp.  Dan,  ii,  19;  vii,  1;  Acts  xvi,  9;  xviii,  9;  xxvii,  23). 

It  is  manifest  that  in  man's  interior  nature  there  exist  powers 
and  latent  possibilities  which  only  extraordinary  occa-   _ 

^   ,  .   .  •'      .  •'  Dreams  evince 

sions  or  peculiar  conditions  serve  to  display.  And  these  latent  powers 
facts  it  becomes  the  interpreter  to  note.  These  latent  °^  *^^  ^°^' 
powers  are  occasionally  seen  in  cases  of  disordered  mental  action 
and  insanity.  The  phenomena  of  somnambulism  and  clairvoyance 
also  exhibit  the  same.  And  ordinary  dreams,  considered  as  abnor- 
mal operations  of  the  perceptive  faculties  uncontrolled  by  the  judg- 
ment and  the  will,  are  often  of  a  striking  and  impressive  character. 
The  dreams  of  Joseph,  of  the  butler  and  baker,  and  of  the  Midian- 
ite, are  not  represented  as  divine  or  supernatural  revelations.  In- 
numerable instances  equally  striking  have  occurred  to  other  men. 
But  at  the  same  time,  all  such  impressive  dreams  bring  out  into 
partial  manifestation  latent  potencies  of  the  human  soul  which  may 
well  have  served  in  the  communication  of  divine  revelations  to 
men.  "The  deep  of  man's  internal  nature,"  observes  Delitzsch, 
"  into  which  in  sleep  he  sinks  back,  conceals  far  more  than  is  mani- 
fest to  himself.  It  has  been  a  fundamental  error  of  most  psycholo- 
gists hitherto  to  make  the  soul  extend  only  so  far  as  its  conscious- 
ness extends;  it  embraces,  as  is  now  always  acknowledged,  a  far 
greater  abundance  of  powers  and  relations  than  can  commonly  ap- 
pear in  its  consciousness.  To  this  abundance  pertains,  moreover, 
the  faculty  of  foreboding,  that  leads  and  warns  a  man  without  con- 
scious motive,  and  anticipates  the  future — a  faculty  which,  in  the 
state  of  sleep,  wherein  the  outer  senses  are  fettered,  is  frequently 
unbound,  and  looms  in  the  remoteness  of  the  future."  ' 

The  profound  and  far-reaching  significance  of  some  prophetic 
dreams  may  be  seen  in  that  of  Jacob  at  Bethel  (Gen.  Jacob's  dream 
xxviii,  10-22).  This  son  of  Isaac  was  guilty  of  grave  at  Bethel, 
wrongs,  but  in  his  quiet  and  thoughful  soul  there  was  a  hiding  of 
power,  a  susceptibility  for  divine  things,  a  spiritual  insight  and 
longing  that  made  him  a  fitter  person  than  Esau  to  lead  in  the  de- 
velopment of  the  chosen  nation.     He  ajopears  to  have  passed  the 

'Biblical  Psycholof^,   English  translation  (Edinb.,  1879),  p.  330.     See  his  whole 
section  on  Sleeping,  Waking,  and  Dreaming,  from  which  the  above  extract  is  taken. 


398  PRINCIPLES   OF 

night  in  the  open  field  near  the  ancient  town  of  Luz  (ver.  19). 
Before  darkness  covered  him  he,  doubtless,  like  Abraham  in  that 
same  place  long  before  (Gen.  xiii,  14),  looked  northward,  and 
southward,  and  eastward,  and  westward,  and  saw  afar  the  hills 
and  mountains  towering  up  like  a  stairway  into  heaven,  and  this 
view  may  have  been,  in  part,  a  psychological  preparation  for  his 
dream.  For,  falling  asleep,  he  beheld  a  ladder  or  stairway  (Qpp), 
perhaps  a  gigantic  staircase  composed  of  piles  of  mountains  placed 
one  upon  another  so  as  to  look  like  a  wondrous  highway  of  passage 
to  the  skies.  The  main  points  of  his  dream  fall  under  four  beholds, 
three  of  vision — "behold,  a  ladder,"  "behold,  angels  of  God,"  "be- 
hold, Jehovah"  (verses  12,  13) — and  one  of  promise — "behold,  I 
am  Y/ith  thee"  (ver,  15).  These  words  imply  an  intense  impres- 
siveness  in  the  whole  revelation.  It  was  a  night  vision  by  means  of 
which  the  great  future  of  Jacob  and  his  seed  was  set  forth  in  sym- 
bol and  in  promise.  For  Jacob  at  the  bottom  of  the  ladder,  Jelio- 
vah  at  the  top,  and  angels  ascending  and  descending,  form  alto- 
gether a  complex  symbol  full  of  profound  suggestions.  It  indicated 
at  least  four  things:  (l)  There  is  a  way  opened  between  earth  and 
heaven  by  which  spirits  may  ascend  to  God.  (2)  The  ministry 
of  angels.  (3)  The  mystery  of  the  incarnation:  for  the  ladder 
was  a  symbol  of  the  Son  of  man,  the  way  {rj  d66g,  John  xiv,  4,  6; 
Heb.  ix,  8)  into  the  holiest  heaven,  the  Mediator  upon  whom,  as  the 
sole  ground  and  basis  of  all  possibility  of  grace,  the  angels  of  God 
ascend  and  descend  to  minister  to  the  heirs  of  salvation  (John  i,  52), 
In  that  mystery  of  grnce  Jehovah  himself  reaches  down  as  from 
the  top  of  the  ladder,  and  lays  hold  upon  this  son  of  Abraham  and 
all  liis  spiritual  seed,  and  lifts  them  up  to  heaven,  (4)  The  prom- 
ise, in  connexion  with  the  vision  (verses  13-15),  emphasized  the 
wonderful  providence  of  God,  who  stood  (ver,  13)  gazing  down 
upon  this  lonely,  helpless  man,  and  making  gracious  provision  for 
him  and  his  posterity. 

We  need  not  assume  that  Jacob  understood  the  far-reaching  im- 
port of  that  dream,  but  it  led  him  to  make  a  holy  vow,  and,  doubt- 
less, it  was  often  afterward  the  subject  of  his  quiet  meditations. 
It  could  not  fail  to  impress  hira  with  the  conviction  that  he  was 
a  special  object  of  Jehovah's  care,  and  of  the  ministry  of  angels. 

It  is  noticeable  that  the  record  of  the  prophetic  dreams  of  the 
Interpretation  heathen,  as,  for  example,  those  of  Pharaoh  and  his  but- 
of  dreams.         ]^,^,  ,^jj,|  \j^\^Qy^  ^f  tj^g,  ]\[iclianite,  and  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 

are  accompanied  by  an  am))le  explanation.  We  observe  also  that 
the  dreams  of  Josepli  and  of  Pharaoh  were  double,  or  repeated  under 
different  forms.     Joseph's  first  dream  was  a  vision  of  sheaves  in 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  399 

the  harvest  field;  his  second,  of  the  sun,  moon,  and  eleven  stars 
(Gen.  XXX vii,  5-11).  They  both  conveyed  the  same  prognostica- 
tion, and  were  so  far  understood  by  his  brethren  and  his  father  as 
to  excite  the  envy  of  the  former  and  draw  the  serious  attention  of 
the  latter.     Joseph  explains  the  two  dreams   of  Pharaoh   as  one 

(Gen.  xli,  25),  and  declared  that  the  repetition  of  the   „ 

^  '        /'  ^  1  Repetition     of 

dream  to  Pharaoh  twice  was  because  the  word  was  dreams  and 
established  from  God,  and  God  was  hastening  to  ac-  ^^^^°°^- 
complish  it  (ver.  32).  Here  is  a  hint  for  the  intei'pretation  of  other 
dreams  and  visions.  Daniel's  dream-vision  of  the  four  beasts  out 
of  the  sea  (Dan.  vii)  is,  in  substance,  a  repetition  of  Nebuchadnez- 
zar's dream  of  the  great  image,  and  the  visions  of  the  eighth  and 
eleventh  chapters,  go  partly  over  the  same  ground  again.  God 
thus  repeats  his  revelations  under  various  forms,  and  thereby  de- 
notes their  certainty  as  the  determinate  purposes  of  his  will.  Many 
visions  of  the  Apocalypse  are  also,  apparently,  symbols  of  the  same 
events,  or  else  move  so  largely  over  the  same  field  as  to  warrant 
the  belief  that  they,  too,  are  repetitions,  under  difl^erent  forms,  of 
things  that  were  shortly  to  come  to  pass,  and  the  certainty  of 
which  was  fixed  in  the  purposes  of  God. 

But   dreams,  we  observed,  were   rather  the  earlier  and   lower 
forms  of  divine  revelation.      A  higher  form  was  that 

,  .  ,.11  Prophetic    ec- 

of  prophetic  ecstasy,  in  which  the  spirit  of  the  seer  stasy  or  vision- 
became  possessed  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  and,  while  yet  ^^  trance, 
retaining  its  human  consciousness,  and  susceptible  of  human  emo- 
tion, was  rapt  away  into  visions  of  the  Almighty  and  made  cogni- 
zant of  words  and  things  which  no  mortal  could  naturally  per- 
ceive. In  2  Sam.  vii,  4-17,  we  have  the  record  of  "a  word  of 
Jehovah  "  that  came  to  Nathan  in  a  night  vision  (see  ver.  1 7)  and 
was  communicated  to  David.  It  contained  the  prophecy  and  prom- 
ise that  his  kingdom  and  throne  should  be  established  forever.  It 
was  for  David  an  impressive  oracle,  and  he  "went  and  sat  down 
before  Jehovah"  (ver.  18),  and  wondered  and  worshipped.  Such 
wonder  and  worship  were  probably,  at  that  or  some  other  time,  a 
means  of  inducing  the  psychological  condition  and  spiritual  ecstasy 
in  which  the  second  psalm  was  composed.  David  becomes  a  seer 
and  prophet.  "  The  Spirit  of  Jehovah  spoke  within  him,  and  his 
word  was  upon  his  tongue"  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  2).  He  is  lifted  into  vis- 
ional ecstasy,  in  which  the  substance  of  Nathan's  prophecy  takes  a 
new  and  higher  form,  transcending  all  earthly  royalty  and  power. 
He  sees  Jehovah  enthroning  his  Anointed  (in't^'O,  his  Messiah)  upon 
Zion,  the  mountain  of  his  holiness  (Psa.  ii,  2,  6).  The  nations  rage 
against  him,  and  struggle  to  cast  off  his  authority,  but  they  are 


400  PRINCIPLES   OF 

utterly  discomfited  by  him  wlio  "  sitteth  in  the  heavens,"  and  to 
whom  the  nations  are  given  for  an  inheritance.  Thus,  the  second 
psahn  is  seen  to  be  no  mere  historical  ode,  composed  upon  the  regal 
inauguration  of  David  or  Solomon,  or  any  other  earthly  prince. 
A  greater  than  either  David  or  Solomon  arose  in  the  psalmist's 
vision.  For  he  is  clearl}'  styled  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  Jehovah; 
the  kings  and  judges  of  the  earth  are  counselled  to  kiss  him,  that 
they  may  not  perish,  and  all  who  put  their  trust  in  him  are 
pronounced  blessed.  And  it  is  only  as  the  interpreter  attains  a 
vivid  apprehension  of  the  power  of  such  ecstasy  that  he  can 
properly  perceive  or  explain  the  import  of  any  Messianic  prophecy. 

Another  illustration  of  the  prophetical  ecstasy  may  be  seen  in 
Ezekiei's  Rap-  Ezekiel's  Statements.  At  the  beginning  of  his  prophe- 
turc.  cies  he  uses  four  different  expressions  to  indicate  the 

form  and  power  in  which  he  received  revelations  (Ezek.  i,  1,  3). 
The  heavens  were  opened,  visions  of  God  were  seen,  the  word  of 
Jehovah  came  with  great  force,'  and  the  hand  of  Jehovah  was  laid 
upon  him.  Allowing  for  whatever  of  the  poetical  element  these 
expressions  contain,  it  remains  evident  that  the  jDrophet  experienced 
a  mighty  interworking  of  human  and  superhuman  powers.  The 
visions  of  God  caused  him  to  fall  upon  his  face  (ver.  28),  and,  anon, 
the  Spirit  lifted  him  up  upon  his  feet  (chap,  ii,  1,  2).  At  another 
time  the  form  of  a  hand  reached  forth  and  took  him  by  a  lock  of 
liis  head,  and  transported  him  in  the  visions  of  God  to  Jerusalem 
(Ezek.  viii,  3).  From  this  it  would  appear  that  for  a  mortal  man 
to  receive  consciously  a  revelation  from  the  Infinite  Spirit  two 
things  are  essential.  The  human  spirit  must  become  divinely  ex- 
alted, or  rapt  away  from  its  ordinary  life  and  operations,  and  the 
Divine  Spirit  must  so  take  possession  of  its  energies,  and  quicken 
them  into  supersensual  perception,  that  they  become  temporary 
organs  of  the  Infinite.  The  whole  process  is  manifestly  a  divine- 
human,  or  theandric  operation.  And  yet,  through  it  all,  the  human 
spirit  retains  its  normal  consciousness  and  knows  the  vision  is 
divine. 

The  same  things  appear  also  in  the  visions  of  Daniel.  He  be- 
( )ther examples  holds  the  prophetic  symbols,  he  hears  the  words  of  the 
of  Ecstasy.  angel  interpreter  Gabriel,  and  he  too  falls  ui)on  his 
face,  overwhelmed  with  the  deep  sleep  that  stupifies  the  active 
j)Owers  of  the  mind,  and  puts  him  in  full  possession  of  the  reveal- 
ing angel  (Dan,  viii,  17,  18).  The  touch  of  the  angel  lifts  him  into 
the  ecstasy  in  which  he  sees  and  hears  the  heavenly  word.     This 

'  Heb.  n*n  ri^n,  coming  came,  the  Hebrew  idiomatic  way  of  giving  emphasis  to  a 

T  T  T 

thought  by  repeating  the  verb,  and  using  its  absolute  infinitive  form. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  401 

peculiar  form  of  prophetic  ecstasy  appears  to  have  differed  from 
the  "dream  and  visions  of  his  head  upon  his  bed"  (Dan.  vii,  1),  in 
that  this  latter  seized  him  during  the  slumbers  of  the  night,  where- 
.as  the  other  came  upon  him  during  his  waking  consciousness,  and 
probably  while  in  the  act  of  prayer  (comp.  chap,  ix,  21).  The  ecs- 
tasy which  came  xipon  Peter  on  the  housetop  came  in  connexion 
with  his  praying  and  a  sense  of  great  hunger  (Acts  x,  9,  10).  The 
act  of  prayer  was  a  spiritual  preparation,  and  the  hunger  fur- 
nished a  physical  and  psychical  condition,  by  means  of  which  the 
form  of  the  vision  and  the  command  to  slay  and  eat  became  the 
more  impressive.  Paul's  similar  ecstasy  in  the  temple  at  Jerusa- 
lem was  preceded  by  prayer  (Acts  xxii,  17),  and  his  experience  of 
these  "  visions  and  revelations  of  God,"  narrated  in  2  Cor.  xii,  1-4, 
was  in  such  a  transcendent  rapture  of  soul  that  he  knew  not 
whether  he  were  in  the  body  or  out  of  the  body.  That  is,  he  knew 
not  whether  his  whole  person  had  been  rapt  away  in  visions  of  God, 
like  Ezekiel  (viii,  3),  or  whether  merely  the  spirit  had  been  elevated 
into  visional  ecstasy.  His  consciousness  in  this  matter  seems  to 
have  been  overcome  by. the  excessive  greatness  [vnegftoXT])  of  the 
revelations  (ver.  7).  And  probably  had  Ezekiel  been  called  upon 
to  say  whether  his  rai)ture  to  Jerusalem  were  in  the  body  or  out  of 
the  body,  he  would  have  answered  as  uncertainly  as  Paul. 

The  prophetic  ecstasy,  of  which  the  above  are  notable  examples, 
was  evidently  a  spiritual  sight  seeing,'  a  supernatural  illumination, 
in  which  the  natural  eye  was  either  closed  (comp.  Num.  xxiv,  3,  4) 
or  suspended  from  its  ordinary  functions,  and  the  inner  senses 
vividly  grasped  the  scene  that  was  presented,  or  the  divine  word 
which  was  revealed.  We  need  not  refine  so  far  as,  with  Delitzsch, 
to  classify  this  divine  ecstasy  into  three  forms,  as  mystic,  prophetic, 
and  charismatic.  All  ecstasy  is  mystic,  and  charismatic  ecstasy 
may  have  been  prophetic;  but  we  may  still,  with  him,  define  pro- 
phetic ecstasy  as  consisting  essentially  in  this,  that  the  human  spirit 
is  seized  and  compassed  by  the  Divine  Spirit,  which  searcheth  all 
things,  even  the  deep  things  of  God,  and  seized  with  such  uplifting 
energy  that,  being  averted  from  its  ordinary  conditions  of  limita- 
tion in  the  body,  it  becomes  altogether  a  seeing  eye,  a  hearing  ear, 
a  perceiving  sense,  that  takes  most  vivid  cognizance  of  things  in 
time  or  eternity,  according  as  they  are  presented  by  the  power  and 
wisdom  of  God.* 

The  grandest  form  of  prophetic  ecstasy  is  that  in  which  the  vision 

'  For  this  reason  the  Old  Testament  prophet  is  often  called  the  seer  (nif^T  and  nth). 
Be  was  a  beholder  of  visions  from  the  Almighty. 
'  Comp.  Delitzsch,  Biblical  Psychology,  p.  421. 
26 


402  PRINCIPLES    OF 

(jiTn)  and  word  (l?"!)  of  Jehovah  appear  to  have  become  so  absorbed 
The  prophet  ^J  the  prophet's  heaven-lit  soul  that  he  himself  persoii- 
lost  in  God.  ateg  tiiy  Holy  One,  and  speaks  in  Jehovah's  name.  So 
we  understand  the  later  chapters  of  Isaiah,  where  the  person  of  the 
prophet  sinks  comparatively  out  of  sight,  and  Jehovah  announces 
himself  as  the  speaker.  So,  too,  Zechariah  announces  the  word  of 
Jehovah  touching  "the  flock  of  slaughter"  Zech.  xi,  4),  but  as  he 
proceeds  with  the  divine  oracle,  he  seems  to  lose  the  consciousness 
of  his  own  distinct  personality,  and  to  speak  in  the  name  and  per- 
son of  his  Lord  (vers.  10-14).' 

A  later  and  mysterious  manifestation  of  spiritual  ecstasy  appears 
in  the  New  Testament  glossolaly,  or  gift  of  speaking 
speaking  with    with  tongues.     Among  the  signs  to  follow  those  who 
tongues.  should  believe  through  the  apostles'  preaching,  a  speak- 

ing with  "new°  tongues"  was  specified  (Mark  xvi,  17);  and  the  dis- 
ciples were  commanded  by  Jesus  to  tarry  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem 
until  they  were  clothed  with  power  from  on  high  (Luke  xxiv,  49). 
On  the  day  of  Pentecost  "  there  came  suddenly  from  heaven  a  sound 
as  of  a  rushing  mighty  wind,  and  it  filled  .all  the  house  where  they 
were  sitting,  and  there  ap])eared  unto  them  self -distributing  (dm/ze- 
Qi^ofievai)  tongues  as  of  fire,  and  it  sat  upon  each  one  of  them,  and 
they  were  all  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  they  began  to  speak 
with  other  tongues  as  the  Spirit  gave  them  utterance"  (Acts  ii,  3,  4). 
A  like  display  was  manifest  at  the  conversion  of  Cornelius  (Acts 
X,  46),  and  when,  after  their  baptism,  Paul  laid  his  hands  upon  the 
twelve  disciples  of  John  the  Baptist  whom  he  found  at  Ephesus 
(Acts  xix,  6).  But  the  most  extensive  treatment  of  the  subject  is 
found  in  1  Cor.  xiv,  with  which, are  to  be  compared  also  the  inci- 
dental references  in  chaps,  xii,  10,  28,  and  xiii,  1.  Flmm  this  Cor- 
inthian  epistle  it  appears,  (1)  that  it  Avas  a  supernatural  gift,  a 
divine  ;!^dptCT(Ua,  that  marked  wilh  a  measure  of  novelty  the  first 
outgoings  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  (2)  There  were  different  kinds 
{ysvT],  soj'ts,  classes,  1  Cor.  xii,  10)  of  tongues.  (3)  The  speaking 
with  tongues  was  a  speaking  unto  God  rather  than  man  (xiv,  2)  and 
an  utterance  of  mysteries,  which  edified  the  subjective  spirit  of  the 

'  "  The  propliet  himself  sometimes  spcalvs  from  God,"  observes  Delitzsch,  "  some- 
times God  liimself  spcalfs  from  the  pro[)het;  sometimes  the  divine  Ego  asserts  itself 
wit'.i  a  supreme  power  that  absorbs  all  other,  sometimes  the  human  in  flic  entire  ful- 
ness of  sanctified  humanity;  but  in  both  cases  it  is  the  personality  of  the  prophet,  in 
the  totality  of  its  pncumatico-psychical  powers,  which  becomes  the  more  active  or  pas- 
sive organ  of  God." — Biblical  Psychology,  p.  421. 

'  The  word  naivalc,  new,  is  omitted  by  several  of  the  chief  SIS.  authorities  for  the 
close  of  Mark's  (Jospel.  In  Westcott  and  Hort's  edition  of  the  Greek  Testament  the 
word  is  placed  in  the  margin,  but  omitted  from  the  text. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  403 

speaker  (ver.  4),  but  was  unintelligible  to  the  common  understand- 
ing (vovg,  ver.  14).  (4)  The  speaking  with  tongues  took  the  form 
of  worship,  and  manifested  itself  in  prayer,  singing,  and  thanks- 
giving (vers.  14-lG).  (5)  Though  edifying  to  the  speaker,  it  did 
not  tend  to  edify  the  Church  unless  one  gifted  with  the  interpreta- 
tion of  tongues,  either  the  speaker  himself  or  another,  explained 
what  was  uttered.  (6)  It  was  a  sign  to  the  unbeliever,  accompanied 
probably  Avith  such  evidences  of  the  supernatural  as,  at  first,  to  im- 
press the  hearer  with  a  sense  of  awe,  but  calculated  on  the  whole 
to  lead  such  as  had  no  sympathy  with  the  Gospel  to  say  that  these 
speakers  were  either  mad  or  filled  with  wine  (ver.  23 ;  comp.  Acts 
ii,  13).  (7)  It  was  a  gift  for  which  one  might  thank  God  (ver.  18), 
and  not  to  be  forbidden  in  the  Church  (ver.  39),  but  was  to  be  cov- 
eted less  than  other  charisms,  and,  especially,  less  than  the  gift  of 
prophesying  unto  the  edifying  of  the  Church  (vers.  1,  5,  19);  for 
"  greater  is  he  who  prophesies  than  he  who  speaks  with  tongues, 
except  he  interpret." 

Such  is  substantially  what  Paul  says  of  this  remarkable  gift.  On 
the  day  of  Pentecost  it  took  the  form  of  appropriating 
the  various  dialects  of  the  hearers,  so  as  to  fill  them  all  ai  Giossoiaiy 
with  amazement  and  wonder  (Acts  ii,  5-12).  This,  how-  ^y^^oiicai. 
ever,  appears  to  have  been  an  exceptional  manifestation,  perhaps  a 
miraculous  exhibition,  for  a  symbolic  purpose,  of  all  the  kinds  of 
tongues  (comp.  1  Cor.  xii,  10),  which  on  other  occasions  were  separ- 
ate and  individually  distinct.  Certainly  the  speaking  with  tongues 
in  the  Corinthian  church  A^as  accompanied  by  no  such  effect  ujion 
the  hearers  as  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  The  once  prevalent  notion 
that  this  giossoiaiy  was  a  supernatural  gift,  by  which  the  first 
preachers  of  the  Gospel  were  enabled  to  proclaim  the  word  of  life 
in  the  various  languages  of  foreign  nations,  has  little  in  its  favour. 
There  is  no  intimation,  outside  of  the  miracle  of  Pentecost,  that 
this  gift  ever  served  such  a  purpose.  And  that  miracle,  whatever 
its  real  nature,  seems  rather  like  a  symbolical  sign,  signifying  that 
the  confusion  of  tongues,  which  came  as  a  curse  at  Babel,  should  be 
counteracted  and  abolished  by  the  Gospel  of  the  new  life,  then 
just  breaking  in  heavenly  charismatic  power  upon  the  world.' 
That  evangelic  word  was  destined  to  become  potent  in  all  the  Ian 
guages  of  men,  and  by  the  living  voice  of  preachers,  and  through 
the  written  volume,  utter  its  heavenly  messages  to  the  nations,  un- 
til all  should  know  the  Lord. 

'  Poena  lin<;uarnm  flispcrsit  homines  (Gen.  xi);  donnm  linpinanim  dispersos  in  unam 
populum  collc.^it  (The  punishment  of  tongues  dcattered  men  abroad;  the  gift  of  tongues 
gathered  the  dispersed  into  one  people). — Grotius,  Annotations  on  Acts,  ii,  3. 


404  PRINCIPLES   OF 

The  exact  nature  of  the  New  Testament  glossolaly  it  is  probably 
now  impossible  to  define.  It  may  have  been,  in  some  instances,  a 
soul-ecstasy,  in  which  men  worshipped  strangely,  and  lost  control  of 
a  part  of  their  faculties.  Something  like  this  was  experienced  by 
Saul  when  he  met  the  band  of  prophets  (1  Sam.  x,  9-rj), 
mysterious  and  when,  at  a  later  time,  he  prophesied  before  Samuel, 
^"^*''"  and  fell  down  under  the  power  of  the  Spirit  of  God 

(1  Sam.  xix,  23,  24).  At  other  times  it  may  have  been  a  condition 
of  receiving  visions  and  revelations  of  God,  as  when  Paul  was 
caught  up  to  paradise,  "and  heard  unspeakable  words,  which  it  is 
not  lawful  for  a  man  to  utter  "  (2  Cor.  xii,  4).  Possibly  in  that  heav- 
enly rapture  this  apostle  received  his  conception  of  "  the  tongues  of 
the  angels"  (1  Cor.  xiii,  1).'  But  whatever  its  real  nature,  it  was 
essentially  an  ecstatic  speaking  of  mysteries  (1  Cor.  xiv,  2),  involv- 
ing such  a  divine  communion  with  God  as  lifted  the  spirit  of  the 
rapt  believer  into  the  realm  of  the  imseen  and  eternal,  and  pro- 
ilticed  in  him  an  awe-inspiring  sense  of  supernatural  exaltation. - 

'  According  to  Stanley,  the  gift  of  tongues  "  was  a  trance  or  ecstasy,  which,  in  mo- 
ments of  great  religious  fervour,  especially  at  the  moment  of  conversion,  seized  the 
early  believers  ;  and  this  fervour  vented  itself  in  expressions  of  thanksgiving,  in  frag- 
ments of  psalmody  or  hymnody  and  prayer,  which  to  tlie  speaker  himself  conveyed  an 
irresistible  sense  of  communion  with  God,  and  to  the  bystander  an  impression  of 
some  extraordinary  manifestation  of  power,  but  not  necessarily  any  instruction  or 
teaching,  and  sometimes  even  having  the  appearance  of  wild  excitement,  like  that  of 
madness  or  intoxication.  It  was  the  most  emphatic  sign  to  each  individual  believer 
that  a  power  mightier  than  his  own  was  come  into  the  world ;  and  in  those  who,  like 
the  Apostle  Paul,  possessed  this  gift  in  a  high  degree,  '  speaking  with  tongues  more 
than  they  all,'  it  would,  when  combined  with  tlie  other  more  remai'kable  gifts  which 
he  possessed,  form  a  fitting  mood  for  the  reception  of  '  God's  secrets '  {fivoTT/piu),  and 
of  '  unspeakable  words,  which  it  is  not  lawful  for  man  to  utter,'  '  being  caught  into 
the  third  heaven,'  and  into  '  Paradise.'  And  thus  the  nearest  written  example  of 
this  gift  is  that  exhibited  in  the  abrupt  style  and  the  strange  visions  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse, in  which,  almost  in  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  the  prophet  is  described  as  being  '  in 
the  Spirit  on  .the  Lord's  day,'  and  'hearing  a  voice  as  of  a  trumpet,'  and  seeing  'a 
door  open  in  heaven,'  and  '  a  throne  set  in  heaven,'  and  '  the  New  Jerusalem,'  '  the 
river  of  life,'  and  '  the  tree  of  life.' " — Epistles  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Corinthians,  pp. 
24fi,  247.     London,  1876. 

''See  Kossteuscher,  (iabc  der  Sprachen  (Marb.,  1850);  Ililgenfcld,  Glossolalie  in  dor 
alton  Kirche  (Lpz.,  1850);  Neander,  Planting  and  Training  of  the  Christian  Church 
(New  ed.,  New  York,  18fi4),  Book  I,  chap,  i;  Schaff,  Hist,  of  the  Christian  Church 
(New  ed.,  New  York,  1882),  vol.  i,  pp.  230-242;  Stanley,  St.  Paul's  Epistles  to  the 
Corintliian.1,  Introductory  Dissertation  to  chap,  xiv;  Kling  on  the  Corinthians  (in 
Lange's  Hibiework),  pp.  282-;U)l,  Amer.  ed.,  translated  and  enlarged  by  Dr.  Poor; 
Keim,  article  Zungenreden,  in  Ilerzog's  Real-Encyclopadie  (vol.  xviii,  ed.  Gotha, 
1864) ;  PI umptre'a  article  ou  the  Gift  of  Tongues  iu  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  405 


CHAPTER  XXL 

PROPHECY    AND    ITS    INTERPRETATION. 

A  THOROUGH  intei'pretation  of  the  prophetic  portions  of  the  holy 
Scripture  is  largely  dependent  upon  a  mastery  of  the  principles 
and  laws  of  figurative  language,  and  of  types  and  symbols.  It  re- 
quires also  some  acquaintance  with  the  nature  of  vision-seeing  ec- 
stacy  and  dreams.  The  foregoing  chapters  have,  therefore,  been  a 
necessary  preparation  for  an  intelligent  study  of  those  more  ab- 
struse writings,  which  have  continuously  exercised  the  most  gifted 
minds  of  the  Church,  and  yet  have  been  most  variously  interpreted. 
Inspired  oracles,  forecasting  the  future,  wrought  out  with  every 
variety  of   figurative  speech,   and  often  embodied  in   „ 

*'  Y    1  •  Magnitude  and 

type  and  symbol,  are  interspersed  throughout  the  entire  scope  of  scrip- 
Scriptures,  and  constitute  a  uniting  bond  between  the  "^"^^  ^''opiiecy. 
Gld  Testament  and  the  New.  The  first  great  prophecy  was  uttered 
in  Paradise,  where  man  originally  sinned  and  first  felt  the  need  of 
a  Redeemer.  It  was  repeated  in  many  forms  and  portions  as  years 
and  centuries  j^assed.  The  Christ  of  God,  the  mighty  Prophet, 
Priest,  and  King,  was  its  loftiest  theme;  but  it  also  dealt  so  copi- 
ously with  all  man's  relations  to  God  and  to  the  world,  with  human 
hopes  and  fears,  with  civil  governments  and  national  responsibili- 
ties, with  divine  laws  and  purposes,  that  its  written  records  are  a 
textbook  of  divine  counsel  for  all  time.' 

Prophesying,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  is  not  primarily  a  pre- 
diction of  future  events.     The  Hebrew  word  for  prophet,   X''3J, 

'  The  subjects  of  prophecy  varied.  Whilst  it  was  all  directed  to  one  general  de- 
sign, in  the  evidence  and  support  of  religion,  there  was  a  diversity  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  Spirit  in  respect  of  that  design.  In  Paradise,  it  gave  the  first  hope  of 
a  Redeemer.  After  the  deluge,  it  established  the  peace  of  the  natural  world.  In 
Abraham  it  founded  the  double  covenant  of  Canaan  and  the  Gospel.  In  the  age  of 
the  law,  it  spoke  of  the  second  prophet,  and  foreshadowed,  in  types,  the  Christian 
doctrine,  but  foretold  most  largely  the  future  fate  of  the  selected  people,  who  were 
placed  under  that  preparatory  dispensation.  In  the  time  of  David  it  revealed  the 
Gospel  kingdom,  with  the  promise  of  the  temporal.  In  the  days  of  the  later  prophets 
it  presignified  the  changes  of  the  Mosaic  covenant,  embraced  the  history  of  the  chief 
pagan  kingdoms,  and  completed  the  annunciation  of  the  Messiah  and  his  work  of 
redemption.  After  the  captivity,  it  gave  a  last  and  more  urgent  information  of  the 
approaching  advent  of  the  Gospel. — Davison,  Discourses  on  Prophecy,  pp.  355,  356. 
Oxford,  1834. 


400  PRINCIPLES    OF 

signifies  one  who  speaks  under  the  pressure  of  a  divine  fervour,' 
Prophecy  not  ^^^  ^^^^  prophet  is  especially  to  be  regarded  as  one  who 
merely  predic-  bears  a  divine  message,  and  acts  as  the  spokesman  of 
ance  of  God's  the  Almighty.  Aaron  was  divinely  appointed  as  the 
truth.  spokesman  of  Moses,  to  repeat  God's   word  from  his 

mouth  (Exod.  iv,  16),  and  thereby  was  Moses  made  as  God  to 
Pharaoh,  and  Aaron  served  as  his  prophet  (N^?^,  Exod.  vii,  1). 
Hence  the  prophet  is  the  announcer  of  a  divine  message,  and  that 
message  may  refer  to  the  past,  the  present,  or  the  future.  It  may 
be  a  revelation,  a  warning,  a  rebuke,  an  exhortation,  a  promise,  or 
a  prediction.  The  bearer  of  such  a  message  is  appropriately  called 
a  "man  of  God"  (1  Kings  xiii,  1 ;  2  Kings  iv,  7,. 9),  and  a  "man  of 
the  Spirit"  (IIos.  ix,  7).  It  is  important  also  to  observe  that  a  very 
large  proportion  of  the  Old  Testament  prophetical  books  consists 
of  warning,  expostulation,  and  rebuke  ;  and  there  are  intimations 
of  many  unwritten  prophecies  of  this  character.  "The  prophets." 
says  Fairbairn,  "  were  in  a  peculiar  sense  the  spiritual  watchmen  of 
Ju<lah  and  Israel,  the  representatives  of  divine  truth  and  holiness, 
whose  part  it  was  to  keep  a  wakeful  and  jealous  eye  upon  the  man- 
ners of  the  times,  to  detect  and  reprove  the  symptoms  of  defection 
which  appeared,  and  by  every  means  in  their  power  foster  and  en- 
courage the  spirit  of  real  godliness.  And  such  pre-eminently  was 
Elijah,  who  is  therefore  taken  in  the  Scripture  as  the  type  of  the 
whole  prophetical  order  in  the  earlier  stages  of  its  development ;  a 
man  of  heroic  energy  of  action  rather  than  of  i^rolific  thought  and 
elevating  discourse.  The  words  he  spoke  were  iew,  but  they  were 
words  spoken  as  from  the  secret  place  of  thunder,  and  seemed  more 
like  decrees  issuing  from  the  presence  of  the  Eternal  than  the  utter- 
ances of  one  of  like  passions  with  those  whom  he  addressed."* 

'  Gesenius  derives  the  word  from  the  root  K33,  equivalent  to  ]}2i,  to  boil  forth;  to 

ffush  out ;  io  flow,  as  a  fountain.  Hence  the  idea  of  one  upon  whom  the  vision-seeing 
ecstacy  falls;  or  of  one  who  is  borne  alonj^  and  carried  aloft  by  a  supernatural  in- 
spiration (i-To  Tvvev/xnTog  uyiov  ^f/jo/vsi'oi ;  2  Pet.  i,  21).  "Hebrew  prophecy,  like  the 
Hebrew  peoi)le,  stands  without  parallel  in  the  history  of  the  world.  Other  nations 
have  had  tlieir  oracles,  diviners,  augurs,  soothsayers,  necromancers.  The  Hebrews 
alone  have  possessed  i)rophets  and  a  prophetic  literature.  It  is  useless,  therefore,  to 
go  to  the  manticism  of  the  heathen  to  get  light  as  to  the  nature  of  Hebrew  piojihecy. 
To  follow  the  rabbis  of  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries  is  just  as  vain.  The 
only  reliable  sources  of  information  on  the  subject  are  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments." — M'Call,  in  Aids  to  Faitli,  p.  97.  On  the  distinction  between  the 
projjhet  (X^^i)  and  the  seer  (riN"),  and  nth)  see   Smith,  Prophecy  a  Preparation  for 

Christ  (Hampton  Lectures),  pp.  68-86.     Boston,  1870. 

'  Prophecy,  viewed  in  respect  to  its  Distinctive  Nature,  Special  Functions,  and 
Proper  Interpretation,  p.  37.  N.  Y.,  18U6.  Philippi  ((Commentary  on  Romans  .\ii,  ti) 
observes  that  "  the  New  Testament  idea  of  the  prophetic  office  is  essentially  identical 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  407 

It  is  25rincipally  those  portions  of  the  prophetic  Scriptures  which 
forecast  the  future  that  call  for  special  hermeneutics.  oniy  prophecies 
Being  exceptional  in  their  character,  they  demand  ^^,,^^^  future 
exceptional  study  and  care  in  interpretation.  Other  hermeneutics. 
prophecies,  consisting  mainly  of  rebuke,  expostulation,  or  warning, 
are  so  readily  apprehended  by  the  common  mind  as  to  need  no 
extended  explanation.  Avoiding,  on  the  one  side,  the  extreme  lit- 
eralistic  error  that  the  biblical  predictions  are  "  history  written  be- 
forehand," and  on  the  other,  the  rationalistic  notions  that  they  are 
either  happy  guesses  of  the  probable  outcome  of  impending  events, 
or  else  a  peculiar  portraiture  of  them  after  they  had  taken  place 
{vaticiniimi  post  evention),  we  accept  these  predictions  as  divine 
oracles  of  events  that  were  subsequently  to  come  to  jDass,  but  so 
expressed  in  figure  and  symbol  as  to  demand  great  care  on  the  part 
of  him  who  would  understand  and  interpret  them.  When  we  deny 
that  prophecy  is  a  history  of  events  before  they  come  to  pass,  we 
mean  to  say  that  prophecy  is  in  no  proper  sense  history, 

.        ,  ''      History  and  pre- 

History  is  the  record  of  what  has  already  occurred;  diction  should 
prediction  is  a  foretelling  of  what  is  to  come,  and  near-  '^o'^^e  confused, 
ly  always  in  some  form  of  statement  or  revelation  that  takes  it  out- 
side of  the  line  of  literal  naiTative.  There  are  cases,  indeed,  where 
the  prediction  is  a  specific  declaration  of  incidents  of  the  simplest 
character;  as  when  Samuel  foretold  to  Saul  the  particular  events 
that  Avould  befall  him  on  his  return  to  Gibeah  (1  Sam.  x,  3-6) ;  but 
it  is  misleading  to  call  even  such  predictions  a  history  of  future 
events,  for  it  is  a  confusion  of  the  proper  usage  of  words.  There 
is  an  element  of  mystery  about  all  predictions,  and  those  of  greatest 
moment  in  the  Scriptures  are  clothed  in  a  symbolic  drapery.* 

with  that  of  the  Old  Testament.  Prophets  are  men  who,  inspired  by  the  Spirit  of 
God,  and  impelled  to  theopneustic  discourse,  partly  remove  the  veil  from  the  future 
(Rev.  i,  3  ;  xxii,  Y,  10 ;  John  xi,  51 ;  Acts  xi,  27,  28  ;  xxi,  10,  11.  Comp.  1  Pet.  i,  10)— 
partly  make  known  concealed  facts  of  the  present,  either  in  discovering  the  secret 
counsel  and  will  of  God  (Luke  i,  67 ;  Acts  xiii,  1 ;  Eph.  iii,  5),  or  in  disclosing  the  hid- 
den thoughts  of  man  (1  Cor.  xiv,  24,  25),  and  dragging  into  light  his  unknown  deeds 
(Matt,  xxvi,  68;  Mark  xiv,  65;  Luke  xxii,  64;  John  iv,  19) — partly  dispense  to  their 
hearers  instruction,  comfort,  exhortation,  in  animated,  powerfully  impassioned  lan- 
guage, going  far  beyond  the  wonted  limits  of  the  capacity  for  teaching,  which,  although 
spiritual,  still  confines  itself  within  the  forms  of  reason  (Matt,  vii,  28,  29;  Luke 
xxiv,  19;  John  vii,  40;  Acts  xv,  82;   1  Cor.  xiv,  3,  4,  31)." 

'  Fairbairn  has  an  able  chapter  on  "  The  place  of  prophecy  in  history,  and  the 
organic  connexion  of  the  one  with  the  other"  (Prophecy,  pp.  33-53).  He  traces  the 
beginning  and  growth  of  prophecy  in  the  sacred  history,  showing  how  "it  appears 
somewhat  like  a  river,  small  in  its  beginnings,  and  though  still  proceeding,  yet  often 
losing  itself  for  ages  under  ground,  then  bursting  forth  anew  with  increased  volume, 
and  at  last  rising  into  a  swollen  stream — greatest  by  far  when  it  has  come  within 


408  PPwINCIPLES  OF 

In  order  to  a  proper  interpretation  of  prophecy  three  things  arc- 
Fundamental  ^^  ^®  particularly  studied,  (1)  the  organic  relations  and 
principles.  inter-dependence  of  the  principal  predictions  on  record ; 
(2)  the  usage  and  import  of  figures  and  symbols;  and  (3)  analysis 
and  comparison  of  similar  prophecies,  especially  such  as  have  been, 
divinely  interpreted,  and  such  as  have  been  clearly  fulfilled. 

1.  Organic  Relations  of  Prophecy. 
In  studying  the  general  structure  and  organic  relations  of  the 
great  prophecies,  it  will  be  seen  that  they  are  first  presented  in 
broad  and  bold  outline,  and  subsequently  expanded  in  their  minor 
details.  Thus  the  first  great  prophecy  on  record  (Gen.  iii,  15)  is  a 
brief  but  far-reaching  announcement  of  the  long  conflict  between 
good  and  evil,  as  these  opposing  principles,  with  all  their  forces, 
connect  themselves  with  the  Promised  Seed  of  the  woman  on  the 
Progressive  one  side,  and  the  old  serpent,  the  devil,  on  the  other, 
character  of  j^.  ^^^y.  ^^  g^^j^j  ^j^^^^-  j^jj  Qt^gj.  prophecies  of  the  Christ 

Messianic  •'  ^       ^  iii-i 

prophecy.  and   the   kingdom  of   God    are   comprehended  m   the 

proteva7iffelium  as  in  a  germ.  From  this  point  onward  through  the 
Scripture  revelations  the  successive  prophecies  sustain  a  noticeably 
progressive  character.  Varying  ideas  of  the  Promised  Seed  appear 
in  the  prophecy  of  Noah  (Gen.  ix,  26,  2V),  and  the  repeated  prom- 
ises to  Abraham  (Gen.  xii,  3;  xvii,  2-8;  xviii,  18).  These  Mes- 
sianic predictions  became  more  definite  as  they  were  repeatedly 
confirmed  to  Isaac,  to  Jacob,  to  Judah,  and  to  the  house  of  David. 
They  constitute  the  noblest  psalms  and  the  grandest  portions  of 
the  Greater  and  the  Lesser  Prophets.  Taken  separately,  these  dif- 
ferent predictions  are  of  a  fragmentary  character;  each  prophet 

prospect  of  its  termination"  (p.  33).  He  observes  further  (p.  43):  "Prophecy,  there- 
fore, being  from  the  very  first  inseparably  linked  with  the  plan  of  grace  unfolded  in 
Scripture,  is,  at  the  same  time,  the  necessary  concomitant  of  sacred  history.  Tlie  two 
mutually  act  and  react  on  each  other.  Prophecy  gives  birth  to  the  history ;  the  his- 
tory, in  turn,  as  it  moves  onward  to  its  destined  completion,  at  once  fulfils  propliecies 
already  given,  and  calls  forth  further  revelations.  And  so  far  from  possessing  the 
character  of  an  excrescence,  or  existing  merely  as  an  anomaly  in  the  procedure  of  God 
toward  men,  prophecy  cannot  even  be  rightly  understood  unless  viewed  in  the  rela- 
tion to  the  order  of  the  divine  dispensations,  and  its  actual  place  in  history.  .  .  . 
However  closely  related  the  two  are  to  each  other,  they  still  have  their  own  distinc- 
tive characteristics  and,  through  these,  their  respective  ends  to  serve.  History  is  the 
occasion  of  prophecy,  but  not  its  measure  ;  for  prophecy  rises  above  history,  borne 
aloft  by  wings  which  carry  it  far  above  the  present,  and  which  it  derives,  not  from 
the  past  occurrences  of  which  history  takes  cognizance,  but  from  Him  to  whom  the 
future  and  the  past  are  alike  known.  It  is  the  communication  of  so  much  of  his  own 
supernatural  light  aa  he  sees  fit  to  let  down  upon  the  datk  movements  of  history,  tO' 
show  whither  thev  are  conducting." 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  40i> 

knew  or  caught  glimpses  of  the  Messianic  future  only  in  part,  and 

he  prophesied  in  part  (1  Cor.  xiii,  9) ;  but  when  the  Christ  himself 

appeared,  and  fulfilled  the  prophecies,  then  all  these  fragmentary 

parts  were  seen  to  form  a  glorious  harmony.' 

The  oracle  of  Balaam  touching  Moab,  Edom,  Amalek,  the  Ken- 

ites,  Asshur,  and  the  power  from  the  side  of  Chittim 

,-^-r  .        ,  \     •        1  1       •  n  Repetitions     of 

(JNum.  XXIV,  17-24),  is  the  prophetic  germ  of  many  oracles  against 

later  oracles  against  these  and  similar  enemies  of  the  •^^^^'^^^ powers. 
chosen  people.  Amos  long  after  takes  up  the  prophetic  word,  and 
speaks  more  fully  against  Damascus,  Gaza,  Tyre,  Edom,  Ammon, 
and  Moab,  and  does  not  except  even  Judah  and  Israel  (Amos  i 
and  ii).  Compare  also  Isaiah's  burden-prophecies  (NE^)  against 
Babylon,  Moab,  Damascus,  Ethiopia,  Egypt,  Media,  Edom,  Arabia, 
and  Tyre  (Isa.  xiii-xxiii),  in  which  we  observe  the  minatory  sen- 
ten(;e  uttered  against  these  heathen  powers  in  great  detail.  And 
as  Balaam  noticed  the  affliction  of  Eber,  (i.  e.,  Israel)  in  connexion 
with  his  last-named  hostile  power  from  Chittim  (Num.  xxiv,  24),  so 
Isaiah  introduces  the  "burden  of  the  valley  of  vision"  (Isa.  xxii,  1) 
just  before  announcing  the  overthrow  of  Tyre  (Isa.  xxiii,  1).  Jer- 
emiah devotes  chapters  xlvi  to  li  to  the  announcement  of  judo-- 
ments  upon  Egypt,  Philistia,  Moab,  Ammon,  Edom,  Damascus, 
Kedar,  Hazor,  Elam,  and  Babylon,  and  amid  these  utterances  of 
coming  wrath  are  intimations  of  Israel's  dispersion  and  sorrow 
(comp,  chap.  1,  17-20,  33;  li,  5,  C,  45).  Compare  also  Ezekiel's 
seven  oracles  against  Ammon,  Moab,  Edom,  Philistia,  Tyre,  Sidon, 
and  Egypt  (Ezek.  xxv  to  xxxii). 

In  noticeable  analogy  with  the  repetition  of  similar  prophecies  by- 
different  prophets,  is  the  repetition  of  the  same  prophecy  by  one 
and  the  same  prophet. 

The  vision  of  the  four  great  beasts,  in  Dan.  vii,  is  essentially  a 
repetition  of  the  vision  of  the  great  image  in  chapter  ii.  Daniel's  two 
The  same  four  great  world-powers  are  denoted  in  these  fif"'  P™P^^«es 

,.,,-,  .  (chaps.  11  and  vii) 

prophecies;  but,  as  has  often  been  observed,  the  imagery  compared, 
is  varied  according  to  the  relative  standpoint  of  the  king  and  the 
prophet,       "As  presented   to   the   view   of   Nebuchadnezzar,  the 
worldly  power  was  seen  only  in  its  external  aspect,  under  the  form 
of  a  colossal  image  possessing  the  likeness  of  a  man,  and  in  its  more 

*  On  the  Messianic  prophecies  see  J.  Pye  Smith,  Scripture  Testimony  to  the  Messiah, 
3  vols.  (Lond.,  1829);  Hengstenberg,  Christology  of  the  Old  Testament,  4  vols.  (Eng. 
trans,  by  Meyer,  Edinb.,  1863);  Tholuck,  Die  Propheten  und  ihre  Wei^sagungen,  pp. 
146-189  (Gotha,  1860);  Leathes,  Witness  of  the  Old  Testament  to  Christ  (Boyle  Lec- 
tures for  1868);  Riehm,  Messianic  Prophecy  (Eng.  trans.,  Edinb.,  1876);  Gloag,  The 
Messianic  Prophecies,  pp.  98-208  (Baird  Lecture,  Edinb.,  1879). 


410  PRINCIPLES   OP 

conspicuous  parts  C'<)ni})Ost'd  of  tlie  shining  and  precious  metals; 
while  the  divine  kingdom  appeared  in  the  meaner  aspect  of  a  stone, 
•without  ornament  or  beauty,  with  nothing,  indeed,  to  distinguish  it 
but  its  resistless  energy  and  perpetual  duration.  Daniel's  visions, 
on  the  other  hand,  direct  the  eye  into  the  interior  of  things,  strip 
the  eai'thly  kingdoms  of  their  false  glory  by  exhibiting  them  under 
the  aspects  of  wild  beasts  and  nameless  monsters  (such  as  are  every- 
where to  be  seen  in  the  grotesque  sculptures  and  painted  entabla- 
tures of  Babylon),  and  reserve  the  human  form,  in  conformity  with 
its  divine,  original,  and  true  idea,  to  stand  as  the  representative  of 
the  kingdom  of  God,  which  is  composed  of  the  saints  of  the  ]Most 
High,  and  holds  the  truth  that  is  destined  to  prevail  over  all  error 
and  ungodliness  of  men."  ^ 

So,  again,  the  impressive  vision  of  the  ram  and  the  he-goat,  in 
The  little  horn  Dan.  viii,  is  but  a  repetition  from  another  standpoint 
and^viu/o'the  (i^hi^shan,  in  Elam,  a  chief  seat  of  the  Medo-Persian 
Slime  power  monarchy)  of  the  previous  vision  of  the  third  and  fourth 
prophetic '^^ as-  heasts.  Differences  in  detail  appear  according  to  the 
I't^^t^s.  analogy  of  all  such  I'epeated  prophecies,  but  these  minor 

differences  should  not  be  allowed  to  obscure  and  obliterate  the 
great  fundamental  analogies.  Few  expositors  of  any  note  have 
doubted  that  the  little  horn  of  Dan.  viii,  9,  denoted  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  the  bitter  persecutor  of  the  Jews,  Avho  "  spoiled  the 
tem2:)le,  and  put  a  stop  to  the  constant  practice  of  offering  a  daily 
sacrifice  of  expiation  for  three  years  and  six  months."  ^  The  first 
and  most  natural  presumption  is  that  the  little  horn  of  cha]).  vii,  8, 
denotes  the  same  impious  and  violent  persecutor.  The  fact  that 
one  prophecy  delineates  the  impiety  and  violence  of  this  enemy 
more  fully  than  another  is  no  evidence  that  two  different  persons 
are  intended.  Otherwise  the  still  fuller  delineation  of  this  mon- 
ster of  iniquity,  given  in  chap,  xi,  must  on  this  sole  ground  be  re- 
ferred to  yet  another  person.  The  statements  that  the  little  horn 
of  chap,  vii,  8  came  up  between  the  ten  horns,  and  rooted  up  three 
of  them,  and  that  of  chap,  viii,  9  came  out  from  one  of  the  four 
horns  of  the  he-goat,  can  have  no  force  in  disproving  the  identity 
of  the  little  horns  in  both  passages  unless  it  is  assumed  that  the  four 
horns  of  chap,  viii,  8  are  identical  with  the  ten  horns  of  chap,  vii,  7 
— an  assumption  wliich  no  one  will  allow.  These  are  but  the  minor 
variations  called  for  by  the  different  positions  occupied  by  the 
l)r()phet  in  the  different  visions.  If  we  understand  the  ten  horns 
of  chap,  vii,  7  as  a  round  number  denoting  the  kings  more  fully 

'  Fairbairn  on  Prophecy,  p.  122. 

'  Josephua,  Wars,  i,  1.     Comp.  Ant.,  xii,  5,  4,  and  1  Maccabees  i. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  411 

described  in  chap,  xi,  and  the  four  conspicuous  horns  of  chap,  viii,  8 
as  the  four  notable  successors  of  Alexander,  the  harmony  of  the 
two  visions  will  be  readily  apparent.  From  one  point  of  view  the 
great  horn  (Alexander)  was  succeeded  by  ten  horns,  and  also  a  lit- 
tle horn  more  notable  in  some  respects  than  any  of  the  ten;  from 
another  standpoint  the  great  horn  was  seen  to  be  followed  by 
four  notable  horns  (the  famous  Diadochoi),  from  the  stump  of 
one  of  which  (Seleucus)  came  forth  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  Only 
a  failure  to  note  the  repetition  of  prophecies  under  various  forms, 
and  from  different  points  of  view,  occasions  the  trouble  which 
some  have  found  in  identifying  prophecies  of  essentially  the  same 
great  events.' 

According  to  the  principle  here  illustrated  the  still  more  minute 
prophecy  of  the  later  period  of  the  Graeco-Macedonian  other  propbet- 
Empire,  in  Dan.  xi,  is  seen  to  travel  over  much  of  the  ic  repetitions. 
same  field  as  those  of  chapters  vii  and  viii.  In  the  same  manner 
we  should  naturally  presume  that  the  seven  vials  of  the  seven  last 
plagues  in  Rev.  xvi  are  intended  to  correspond  with  the  seven  woe- 
trumpets  of  chapters  viii-xi.  The  striking  resemblances  between 
the  two  are  such  as  to  force  a  conviction  that  the  terrible  woes 

'Pusey's  discussion  of  this  subject  (Lectures  on  Daniel,  Oxford,  1868)  is  an  illustra- 
tion of  the  dogmatic  way  in  which  a  writer  may  magnify  and  mystify  the  merely  for- 
mal and  structural  differences  of  visions.  He  affirms  (p.  91):  "The  four-horned  he- 
goat  cannot  agree  with  the  fourth  empire,  whose  division  into  ten  is  marked  by  the  ten 
horns  of  the  terrible  beast  and  the  ten  toes  of  the  image.  Nor  can  the  heavy  ram, 
with  its  two  horns,  be  identified  with  the  superhuman  swiftness  of  the  four-headed 
leopard."  But,  according  to  Pusey,  the  two-horned  ram  of  chap,  viii,  3,  4,  corre- 
sponds with  the  bear  of  chap,  vii,  5,  and  the  he-goat  corresponds  with  the  four-winged 
and  four-headed  leopard  of  chap,  vii,  6.  If,  then,  a  ram  with  two  horns  "  pushing 
westward,  and  northward,  and  southward,  etc."  (viii,  4),  agrees  with  a  bear  having  no 
horns  at  all,  and,  so  far  from  pushing  in  any  direction,  is  merely  "  raised  up  on  one 
side  ready  to  use  the  arm  in  which  its  chief  strength  lies,"  and  "  lifts  itself  up  heav- 
ily, in  contrast  with  the  winged  rapidity  of  the  Chaldean  conquests  "  (Pusey,  p.  72), 
and  holds  three  ribs  in  its  teeth — with  what  consistency  can  it  be  claimed  that  the 
differences  in  the  descriptions  of  the  little  horns  of  chaps,  vii  and  viii  must  be  fun- 
damental ?  Pusey  has  no  difficulty  in  harmonizing  a  he-goat  having  one  notable  horn, 
and  then  four  horns  in  its  place,  and  one  little  horn  branching  out  of  one  of  the  four, 
with  a  leopard  having  four  wings  and  four  heads ;  but  he  pronounces  it  impossible 
for  a  goat  which  at  one  stage  has  one  horn,  and  at  another  four,  to  agree  with  a  ter- 
rible beast  which  at  one  period  had  ten  horns !  It  is,  forsooth,  easy  to  harmonize  an 
animal  having  one  horn  and  four  horns,  with  an  animal  having  four  heads  and  four 
wings,  and  no  horns  at  all ;  but  impossible  to  believe  that  a  goat  having  one  horn, 
and  afterward  four  horns,  can  agree  with  a  beast  having  ten  horns !  Such  incon- 
sistency cannot  be  based  upon  sound  hermeneutical  principles.  See  Zocklcr  on  Dan- 
iel in  loco,  translated  and  annotated  by  Strong  in  the  American  edition  of  Lange's , 
PiMcwork. 


412  PRINCIPLES   OF 

denoted  by  the  trumpets  are  substantially  identical  with  the  plagues 
denoted  by  the  vials  of  wrath.  A  contrary  opinion  would  make 
the  case  a  remarkable  exception  to  the  analogy  of  prophecy,  and 
should  not  be  accepted  without  the  most  convincing  reasons. 

2.  Figurative  and  Symbolical  Style  of  Prophecy. 

The  fact  already  observed,  that  the  word  of  prophecy  was  re- 

erv     the   reived  by  visions  and  dreams,  and  in  a  state  of  ecstacy, 

most    natural   accounts  largely  for  the   further  fact  that  so  great  a 

pressing  reve-  portion  of  the  prophetic  Scriptures  is  set  forth  in  ligur- 

lations  ob-   ative  lanffuaafe  and  in  symbol.'     This  important  fact  is 

tained  by  vis-  o      o  ^  ^  ^ 

ions       and  too  often  overlooked   in  prophetic  interpretation,  and 

dreams.  hence  has  arisen  the  misleading  doctrine  that  ])rophecy 

is  "  history  written  beforehand."  Accepting  such  an  idea,  one  is 
prone  to  press  the  litei'al  meaning  of  all  passages  which  may,  by  any 
possibility,  admit  of  such  a  construction;  and  hence  the  endless  con- 
troversies and  vagaries  in  the  exposition  of  the  prophetical  Scrip- 
tures. But  observe  for  a  moment  the  style  and  diction  of  the  great 
predictions.  The  first  one  on  record  announces  a  standing  enmity 
between  the  serpent  and  the  woman  and  their  progeny;  and,  ad- 
dressing the  serpent,  God  says:  "lie  shall  bruise  thy  head,  and 
thou  shalt  bruise  his  heel"  (Gen.  iii,  15).  There  have  not  been 
wanting  literalists  who  have  applied  the  prophecy  to  the  enmity 
between  men  and  serpents,  and  who  declare  that  it  is  fulfilled  when- 
ever a  serpent  bites  a  man,  or  whenever  a  man  crushes  a  serpent's 
head.  But  such  an  interpretation  of  the  passage  has  never  been 
able  to  command  any  general  acceptance.  Its  deeper  import  re- 
specting the  children  of  light  and  the  children  of  darkness,  and 

'  The  fundamental  reason  of  the  figurative  style,  which  is  so  prominent  a  charac- 
teristic of  prophecy,  must  be  sought  in  the  mode  of  revelation  by  vision.  In  the 
higher  species  of  prophecy,  wliich  was  connected  with  no  ecstatic  elevation  on  the 
part  of  the  writer,  but  with  his  ordinary  frame  of  mind ;  that,  namely,  of  which  the 
most  eminent  examples  are  to  be  found  in  Moses  and  Christ ;  the  language  employed 
does  not,  in  general,  differ  from  the  style  of  ordinary  discourse.  But  prophecy,  in 
the  more  special  and  peculiar  sense,  having  been  not  only  (framed  on  purpose  to  veil 
while  it  announced  the  future,  but  also  communicated  in  vision  to  the  prophets,  must 
have  largely  consisted  of  figurative  representations;  for,  as  in  vision  it  is  the  im- 
aginative faculty  that  is  more  immediately  called  into  play,  images  were  necessary  to 
make  on  it  the  fitting  impressions,  and  these  impressions  could  only  be  conveyed  to 
others  by  means  of  figurative  representations.  Hence  the  two,  prophetic  visions  and 
figurative  representations,  arc  couf)led  together  by  the  prophet  Ilosea  (xii,  10)  as  the 
proper  correlatives  of  each  other:  "I  have  also  spoken  by  the  prophets,  and  I  have 
multiplied  visions  and  used  simiiitmU's  liy  tlio  iiiinistiy  of  the  prophets." — Fairbaim 
on  Prophecy,  ]>.  117. 


BIBLICAL    IIEKMENEUTICS.  413 

their  respective  heads  (Messiah  and  Satan),  has  been  universally  rec- 
ognized by  the  best  interpreters.  "  It  is  a  sign  and  witness,"  says 
Fairbairn,  "  set  up  at  the  very  threshold  of  the  prophetic  Fairbaim  on 
territory,  showing  how  much  prophecy,  in  the  general  ^'^^-  i"'  ^^■ 
foi'm  of  its  announcements,  might  be  expected  to  take  its  hue  and  as- 
pect from  the  occasion  and  circumstances  that  gave  rise  to  it;  how 
it  would  serve  itself  of  things  seen  and  present  as  a  symbolical 
cover  under  which  to  exhibit  a  perspective  of  things  which  were  to 
be  hereafter;  and  how,  even  when  there  might  be  a  certain  fulfil- 
ment of  what  was  written  according  to  the  letter,  the  terms  of  the 
prediction  might  yet  be  such  as  to  make  it  evident  that  something 
of  a  higher  kind  was  required  properly  to  verify  its  meaning. 
Such  plainly  was  the  case  with  respect  to  the  prediction  at  the  fall; 
and  in  proof  that  it  must  be  so  read  and  understood,  some  of  the 
later  intimations  of  prophecy,  which  are  founded  upon  the  address 
to  the  serjjent,  vary  the  precise  form  of  the  representation  which 
they  give  of  the  ultimate  termination  of  the  conflict.  Thus  Isaiah, 
when  descanting  on  the  peace  and  blessedness  of  Messiah's  king- 
dom, tells  us  not  of  the  serpent's  head  being  bruised,  but  of  his 
power  to  hurt  being  destroyed;  of  dust  being  his  meat,  and  of  the 
child  playing  upon  his  hole  (chapters  xi,  8,  9;  Ixv,  25).  It  is  the  same 
truth  again  that  appears  at  the  close  of  the  Apocalypse  under  the 
still  different  form  of  chaining  the  old  serpent,  and  casting  him  into 
the  bottomless  pit,  that  he  might  not  deceive  the  nations  any  more 
(Rev.  XX,  2,  3) ;  his  power  to  deceive  in  the  one  case  corresponding 
to  his  liberty  to  bruise  the  heel  in  the  other,  and  his  being  chained 
and  imprisoned  in  the  bottomless  pit  to  the  threatened  bruising  of 
his  head."  ' 

In  like  manner  we  note  that  Jacob's  dying  prophecy  (Gen.  xlix) 
is  written  in  the  highest  style  of  poetic  fervour  and  of  poeticform 
figurative  speech.  All  the  events  of  the  patriarch's  life  many^  pro\e- 
and  the  storied  fulness  of  the  future  moved  his  soul,  cies. 
and  gave  emotion  to  his  words.  The  oracles  of  Balaam  and  the 
songs  of  Moses  are  of  the  same  high  order.  The  Messianic 
psalms  abound  with  simile  and  metaphor,  drawn  from  the  heavens, 
the  earth,  and  the  seas.  The  prophetical  books  are  mostly  written 
in  the  forms  and  spirit  of  Hebrew  poetry,  and,  in  predictions  of 
notable  events,  the  language  often  rises  to  forms  of  statement, 
which,  to  an  occidental  critic,  might  seem  a  hyperbolical  extrava- 
gance. Take,  for  example,  the  following  "  burden  of  Babylon " 
which  Isaiah  saw  (njn),  and  note  the  excessive  emotion  and  the 
boldness  of  figures  (Isa.  xiii,  2-13): 

'  Fairbaim  on  Prophecy,  p.  102. 


414  PRINCIPLES   OF 

2  Ou  a  mountain  bare  set  up  a  signal; 
Lift  up  a  voice  to  them  ;  wave  a  hand, 
And  tliey  shall  enter  gates  of  nobles. 

3  Also  I  liave  called  my  mighty  ones  for  my  anger — 
Those  that  exult  proudly  in  my  glory. 

4  Voice  of  a  multitude  in  the  mountains,  as  of  much  people; 
Voice  of  a  tumult  of  kingdoms  of  nations  assembled, 
Jehovah  of  hosts  mustering  a  host  of  battle; 

5  Coming  from  a  land  afar, 
From  the  end  of  the  heavens — 
Jehovah  and  the  instruments  of  his  fury. 
To  lay  waste  all  the  land. 

6  Howl  ye!     For  near  is  the  day  of  Jehovah ; 
As  a  destruction  from  Shaddai  shall  it  come. 

7  Therefore  shall  all  hands  become  slack, 
And  every  heart  of  man  shall  melt. 

8  And  they  shall  be  in  trepidation; 
Writhings  and  throes  sjiall  seize  them; 

As  the  travailing  woman  shall  they  twist  in  pain. 
Each  at  his  neighbour  they  shall  look  astonished, 
Their  faces,  faces  of  flames. 

9  Behold,  the  day  of  Jehovah  comes; 
Cruel — and  wrath,  and  burning  of  auger, 
To  make  the  land  a  desolation, 

And  her  sinners  will  be  destroyed  out  of  her. 

10  For  the  stars  of  tlie  heavens  and  their  constellations 
Shall  not  shed  forth  their  light; 

Dark  has  the  sun  become  in  his  going  forth. 
And  the  moon  will  not  cause  her  light  to  shine. 

11  And  I  will  visit  upon  the  world  evil, 
And  upon  the  wicked  their  iniquity. 

And  I  will  cause  the  arrogance  of  the  proud  to  cease, 
And  the  haughtiness  of  the  lawless  I  bring  low. 

12  I  will  make  men  rarer  than  refined  gold, 
'And  mankind  than  the  gold  of  Ophir. 

13  Therefore  I  will  make  heaven  tremble, 
And  the  land  shall  shake  from  her  place. 

In  the  overflowiug  wrath  of  Jehovah  of  hosts, 
And  in  the  day  of  the  burning  of  his  anger. 

It  has  never  been  questioned  by  the  best  interpreters  that  the 
Refers  to  the  'ibove  passafijc  refers  to  the  overthrow  of  Babylon  by  the 
fall  of  Babylon.  Medes.  The  heading  of  the  chapter,  and  tlie  specific 
statements  that  follow  (verses  17,  19),  put  this  beyond  all  doubt. 
And  yet  it  is  done,  accordinc^  to  the  prophet,  by  Jehovali,  who 
musters  his  host  of  mirjhty  heroes  from  the  end  of  the  heavens, 
causes   a  tumultuous  noise   of   kingdoms  of   nations,   fills   human 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  415 

hearts  with  trembling,  and  despair,  and  throes  of  agony,  shakes 
heaven  and  earth,  and  blots  out  sun,  and  moon,  and  stars.  This 
fearful  judgment  of  Babylon  is  called  "  the  day  of  Jehovah,"  "  the 
day  of  the  burning  of  his  anger."  Standing  in  the  forefront  of 
Isaiah's  oracles  against  the  heathen  world-powers,  it  is  a  classic 
passage  of  the  kind,  and  its  style  and  imagery  would  naturally  be 
followed  by  other  prophets  when  announcing  similar  judgments.* 

Such  highly  emotional  and  figurative  passages  are  common  to  all 
the  prophetic  writers,  but  in  the  so-called  apocalyptic  prominence  of 
prophets  we  note  a  peculiar  prominence  of  symbolism.  a^™^°[^i '°  f/g 
In  its  earlier  and  yet  undeveloped  form  it  first  strikes  our  books. 
attention  in  the  Book  of  Joel,  which  may  be  called  the  oldest  apoca- 
lypse. But  its  fuller  development  appears  among  the  later  proph- 
ets, Daniel,  Ezekiel,  and  Zechariah,  and  its  perfected  structure  in 
the  New  Testament  Apocalypse  of  John.  In  the  exposition,  there- 
fore, of  this  class  of  prophecies  it  is  of  the  first  importance  to  apply 
with  judgment  and  skill  the  hermeneutical  principles  of  biblical 
symbolism.  This  process  requires,  especially,  three  Three  herme- 
things:  (1)  That  we  be  able  clearly  to  discriminate  and  efpte'ti  be'obl 
determine  what  are  symbols  and  what  are  not;  (2)  that  served. 
the  symbols  be  contemplated  in  their  broad  and  striking  aspects 
rather  than  their  incidental  points  of  resemblance;  and  0)  that 
they  be  amply  compared  as  to  their  general  import  and  usage,  so 
that  a  uniform  and  self-consistent  method  be  folloAved  in  their  in- 
terpretation. A  failure  to  observe  the  first  of  these  will  lead  to 
endless  confusion  of  the  symbolical  and  the  literal.  A  failure  in 
the  second  tends  to  magnify  minute  and  unimportant  points  to  the 
obscuring  of  the  greater  lessons,  and  to  the  misapprehension,  oft- 
times,  of  the  scope  and  import  of  the  whole.  Not  a  few  interpret- 
ers have  put  great  stress  upon  the  import  of  the  ten  toes  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar's image  (Dan.  ii,  41,  42),  and  have  searched  to  find  ten 
kings  to  correspond;  whereas,  from  aught  that  appears  to  the  con- 
trary, the  image  may  have  had  twelve  toes,  like  the  giant  of  Gath 

'  "  Such  passages,"  says  Fairbairn,  "  are  not  to  be  regarded  simply  as  highly 
wrought  descriptions  in  the  peculiar  style  of  oriental  poetry,  possessing  but  a  slender 
foundation  of  nature  to  rest  upon.  On  the  contrary  they  have  their  correspondence 
in:  the  literature  of  all  nations,  and  their  justification  in  the  natural  workings  of  the 
human  mind ;  we  mean  its  workings  when  under  circumstances  which  tend  to  bring 
the  faculty  of  imagination  into  vigorous  play,  much  as  it  was  acted  on  with  the 
prophets  when,  in  ecstacy,  they  received  divine  revelations.  For  it  is  the  character- 
istic of  this  faculty  when  possessed  in  great  strength,  and  operated  upon  by  stirring 
events  such  as  mighty  revolutions  and  distressing  calamities,  that  it  fuses  every  olj- 
ject  by  its  intense  radiation,  and  brings  them  into  harmony  with  its  own  prevailing 
passion  or  feeling." — Prophecy,  p.  1.58. 


416  PRINCIPLES    OF 

(2  Sam.  xxi,  20).  A  care  to  observe  the  third  nile  will  enable  one 
to  note  the  differences  as  well  as  the  likeness  of  similar  symbols, 
and  save  him  from  the  error  of  supposing  that  the  same  symbol, 
when  employed  by  two  different  writers,  must  denote  the  same 
power,  person,  or  event. 

3.  Analysis  and  Comparison  of  Similar  Prophecies. 

Not  only  are  the  same,  or  like  figures  and  symbols,  employed  by 
different  prophets,  but  also  many  whole  prophecies  are  so  like  one 
another  in  their  general  form  and  import  as  to  require  of  the  inter- 
preter a  minute  comparison.  Thus  only  can  he  distinguish  things 
which  are  alike  and  things  which  differ. 

First  we  observe  numerous  instances  in  which  one  prophet  ap- 
verbai  anaio-  pears  to  quote  from  another.  Isa.  ii,  1-4  is  almost  iden- 
»'«s.  tical  with  Micah  iv,  1-3,  and  it  has  been  a  problem  of 

critics  to  determine  whether  Isaiah  quoted  from  Micah,  or  Micah 
from  Isaiah,  or  both  of  them  from  an  older  prophet  now  unknown. 
Jeremiah's  prophecy  against  Edom  (xlix,  7-22)  is  appropriated 
largely  from  Obadiah.  The  Epistle  of  Jude  and  the  second  chap- 
ter of  Peter's  Second  Epistle  furnish  a  similar  analogy.  A  compar- 
ison of  the  oracles  against  the  heathen  nations  by  Balaam,  Amos, 
Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  Ezekiel,  as  already  indicated,  shows  many 
verbal  parallels.  From  all  which  it  appears  that  these  sacred  writ- 
ers freely  appropriated  forms  of  expression  from  each  other  as  from 
a  common  treasure  house.'  The  word  of  God,  once  uttered  by  an 
inspired  man,  became  the  common  property  of  the  chosen  people, 
and  was  used  by  them  as  times  and  occasions  served. 

The  twofold  presentation  of  prophetic  revelations,  both  of  vis- 
Twofoid  pre-  ions  and  of  dreams,  demands  particular  attention.  It 
prophetic  rev-  ^^  ^^'^^  brought  to  our  attention  in  the  dreams  of  Joseph 
eiations.  and  of  Pharaoh,  and  as  we  have  seen  above  (pp.  398, 

399),  the  double  dream  was,  in  its  significance,  but  one,  and  the 
repetition  under  different  symbols  was  the  divine  method  of  inten- 
sifying the  impression,  and  indicating  the  certainty  of  the  things 
revealed.  "As  to  the  doubling  of  the  dream  to  Pharaoh  twice,  it 
is  because  the  word  ("i^'^l',  this  particular  revelation)  from  God 
is  established,  and  God  is  hastening  to  accomplish  it"  (Gen.  xli,  32). 
A  principle  of  prophetic  interpretation  so  explicitly  enunciated 
in  the  earliest  records  of  divine  revelation  deserves  to  be  made 

'  "  Such  verbal  repetitions,"  says  Hengatenberg,  "  must  not  be,  by  any  means,  con- 
sidered as  unintentional  reminiscences.  They  served  to  exhibit  that  the  prophets  ac- 
knowledged one  another  as  the  organs  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  —  Christ}>logy,  vol.  i, 
p.  '291. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  417 

prominent.'  It  serves  as  a  key  to  the  explanation  of  many  of  the 
most  difficult  questions  involved  in  the  apocalyptic  Scriptures.  "We 
shall  have  occasion  to  illustrate  this  principle  more  fully  in  treating 
the  visions  of  Daniel  and  John, 

It  is  important,  furthermore,  to  study  the  analogies  of  imagery 
in  the  apocalyptic  portions  of  prophecy.  Isaiah's  vis-  Analogies  of 
ion  of  the  Seraphim  (Isa.  vi,  1-8),  Ezekiel's  vision  of  imagery. 
the  Living  Creatures  (Ezek.  i  and  x),  and  John's  vision  of  the 
throne  in  heaven  (Rev.  iv),  have  manifest  relations  to  one  another 
which  no  interpreter  can  fail  to  observe.  The  scope  and  bearing 
of  each  can,  however,  be  apprehended  only  as  we  study  them  from 
the  standpoint  of  each  individual  prophet.  Daniel's  vision  of  the 
four  beasts  out  of  the  sea  (Dan.  vii)  furnishes  the  imagery  by 
which  John  depicts  his  one  beast  out  of  the  sea  (Rev.  xiii,  1-2), 
and  we  note  that  the  one  beast  of  the  latter,  being  a  nameless  mon- 
ster, combines  also  the  other  main  features  (leopard,  bear,  lion)  of 
the  four  beasts  of  the  former.  John's  second  beast  out  of  the 
earth,  with  two  horns  like  a  lamb  (Rev.  xiii,  11),  combines  much 
of  the  imagery  of  both  the  ram  and  the  he-goat  of  Daniel  (viii, 
1-12).  Zechariah's  vision  of  the  four  chariots,  drawn  by  diflFerent 
coloured  horses  (vi,  1-V),  forms  the  basis  of  the  symbolism  of  the 
first  four  seals  (Rev.  vi,  1-8),  and  John's  glowing  picture  of  the 
New  Jerusalem,  the  new  heavens  and  the  new  land  (xxi,  xxii),  is  a 
manifest  counterpart  of  the  closing  chapters  of  Ezekiel,  The  most 
noticeable  difference,  perhaps,  is  that  Ezekiel  has  a  long  and  minute 
description  of  a  temple  and  its  service  (xl-xliv),  while  no  temple 
appears  in  the  vision  of  John,  but  rather  the  city  itself  becomes  all 
temple,  nay,  a  Holy  of  Holies,  being  filled  with  the  glory  of  God 
and  of  the  Lamb  (Rev.  xxi,  3,  22,  23). 

It  will  be  evident  from  the  above-mentioned  analogies  that  no  prop- 
er interpretation  of  any  one  of  these  similar  prophecies  similar  imag- 
•can  be  given  without  a  clear  analysis  and  careful  corapar-  dige'rent^^sub- 
ison  of  all.  We  are  not  to  assume,  however,  that  by  the  jects. 
use  of  the  same  or  similar  imagery  one  prophet  must  needs  refer  to 
the  same  subject  as  the  othei*.  The  two  olive  trees  of  Rev,  xi,  4 
are  not  necessarily  the  same  as  those  of  Zech,  iv,  3,  14.  The 
beasts  of  John's  Apocalypse  are  not  necessarily  identical  with  those 
of  Daniel,  John's  vision  of  the  new  heaven,  and  the  new  land, 
and  the  golden  city,  is  doubtless  a  fuller  revelation  of  redeemed 
Israel  than  Ezekiel's  corresponding  vision.  But  one  of  these  vis- 
ions cannot  be  fully  expounded  without  the  other,  and  each  should 

'  For  many  valuable   suggestions  on   what  he  calls   the  "  Double   Allegory,"  see 
Cochran,  The  Revelation  of  John  its  Own  Interpreter,  New  York,  1860. 
27 


418  PRINCIPLES   OF 

be  subjected  to  a  minute  analysis,  and  studied  from  its  own  histor- 
ical or  visional  standpoint. 

From  these  considerations  it  will  be  also  seen  that,  while  duly 
General  sum-  appreciating  the  peculiarities  of  prophecy,  we  neverthe- 
mary.  ]egg  must  employ  in  its  interpretation  essentially  the 

same  great  principles  as  in  the  interpretation  of  other  ancient  writ- 
ings. First,  we  should  ascertain  the  historical  position  of  the 
prophet;  next  the  scope  and  plan  of  his  book;  then  the  usage  and 
import  of  his  words  and  symbols;  and,  finally,  ample  and  discrimi- 
nating comparison  of  the  parallel  Scriptures  should  be  made. 


***■ 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

DANIEL'S  VISION  OF  THE  FOUR  EMPIRES. 

All  interpreters  agree  that  the  empires  or  world-powers  denoted  by 
Principles  11-  the  various  parts  of  the  great  image  in  Dan.  ii,  31-45, 
lustrated  by  j^jj^j  i^y  ^[jg  f^yj.  ^gasts  from  the  sea  (Dan.  vii),  are  the 
Daniel  s  double  •  •«? 

revelation    of  same.   The  prophecy  is  repeated  under  different  symbols, 

empires.  ^^^^  ^^^q  interpretation  is  one.     This  double  revelation, 

then,  will  be  of  special  value  in  illustrating  the  hermeneutical  prin- 
ciples already  enunciated.  But  in  no  portion  of  Scripture  do  we 
need  to  exercise  greater  discrimination  and  care.  These  prophe- 
cies, in  their  details,  have  been  variously  understood,  and  the  most 
able  and  accomplished  exegetes  have  differed  widely  in  their  ex- 
planations. All  dogmatism  of  tone  and  method  should  therefore  be 
excluded,  and  we  should  endeavour  to  place  ourselves  in  the  very 
position  of  the  prophet,  and  study  with  minute  attention  his  lan- 
guage and  his  symbols.  Where  such  wide  differences  of  opinion 
have  prevailed  we  cannot  for  a  moment  allow  any  a  priori  assumj)- 
tions  of  what  ought  to  be  found  in  these  prophecies,  or  of  wliat 
ought  not  to  be  found  there.'     All  such  assumptions  are  fatal  to 

'  The  Roman  Empire,  the  papacy,  the  Mohammedans,  the  Goths  and  Vandals,  the 
French  Revohition,  the  Crimean  War,  the  United  States  of  America,  and  our  hito  civil 
.var  between  the  North  and  the  South,  have  all  been  assumed  to  have  such  an  iniport- 
aiice  in  the  history  of  humanity  and  of  the  Gospel  that  we  should  expect  to  lin.l 
some  notice  of  them  somewhere  in  the  prophets  of  the  Bible.  Daniel  and  the  Reve- 
lation of  John,  nl)ouii(ling  as  they  do  in  vision  and  symbol,  have  been  searched  more 
than  other  prophecies  with  such  an  expectation.  We  find  even  Barnes  writing:  us 
follows :  "  The  Roman  Empire  was  in  itself  too  important,  and  performed  too  import- 
ant an  af^ency  in  prepariiij^  the  world  for  the  kingdom  of  the  Redeemer,  to  be  omitted 
in  sucli  an  enumeration." — Notes  on  Dan.  ii,  40,  p.  M7.     On  the  same  principle  v.„' 


EIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  419 

sound  interpretation.  The  prophet  should  be  permitted,  as  far  as 
possible,  to  explain  himself;  and  the  interpreter  should  not  be  so 
full  of  ideas  drawn  from  profane  history,  or  from  remote  ages  and 
peoples,  as  to  desire  to  find  in  Daniel  what  is  not  manifestly  there. 
Especially  when  it  is  a  notable  fact  that  profane  history  knows 
nothing  of  Belshazzar,'  or  of  Darius  the  Mede,  should  we  be  cau- 
tious how  far  we  allow  our  interpretation  of  other  parts  of  Daniel 
to  be  controlled  by  such  history. 

Three  different  interpretations  of  Daniel's  vision  of  the  four 
world-powers  have  long  prevailed.  According  to  the  Three  different 
first  and  oldest  of  these,  the  fourth  kingdom  is  the  interpretations. 
Roman  Empire;  another  identifies  it  with  the  mixed  dominion  of 
Alexander's  successors,  and  a  third  makes  it  include  Alexander  and 
his  successors.'^  Those  who  adopt  this  last  view  regard  the  Median 
rule  of  Darius  at  Babylon  (Dan.  v,  31)  as  a  distinct  dynasty.  The 
four  kingdoms,  according  to  these  several  expositions,  may  be  seen 
in  the  following  outline: 


1st. 

2d. 

3d. 

1. 

Babylonian. 

1. 

Babylonian. 

1. 

Babylonian. 

3. 

Medo-Persian. 

2. 

Medo-Persian. 

2. 

Median. 

3. 

Graeco-Macedonian. 

3. 

Alexander. 

8. 

Persian. 

4. 

Roman. 

4. 

Alexander's  successors. 

4. 

Grseco-Macedoniau 

Any  one  of  these  views  will  sufiice  to  bring  out  the  great  ethical  and 
religious  lessons  of  the  prophecy.    No  doctrine,  therefore,  is  affected, 

might  insist  that  the  Chinese  Empire,  with  its  great  djTiasties,  and  countless  millions 
of  people,  and  also  those  of  India  and  Japan,  should  also  have  some  kind  of  notice. 
We  have  no  right  to  assume  in  advance  what  Daniel's  vision  or  Nebuchadnezzar's 
dream  should  contain. 

'  This  fact  greatly  puzzled  all  expositors  until  an  inscription  discovered  on  a  cylin- 
der at  Mugheir  showed  that  a  Bel-shar-uzur  was  associated  with  his  father  as  co-regent 
at  Babylon.     See  Rawlinson,  Ancient  Monarchies,  vol.  iii,  p.  70.     New  York,  IS'/l. 

-  The  first  of  these  views  is  ably  defended  by  Barnes,  Pusey,  and  Keil,  and  is  the 
one  held,  probably,  by  most  evangelical  divines.  The  second  has  its  ablest  advocates 
in  Bertholdt,  Stuart,  and  Cowles.  The  third  is  maintained  by  Eichhorn,  Lengerkc, 
Maurer,  Bleek,  De  Wette,  Hilgenfeld,  Kranichfeld,  Delitzsch,  and  Westcott.  It  is 
quite  possible  that  the  prevalence  among  English  expositors  of  the  first  theory  is 
largely,  if  not  mainly,  due  to  the  fact  that  the  arguments  in  its  favour  have  been  scat- 
tered broadcast  by  the  popular  commentaries,  and  the  able  expositions  of  the  other 
theories  have  been  quite  generally  inaccessible  to  English  readers.  Many  have  ac- 
cepted the  current  exposition  because  they  never  had  a  better  one  clearly  set  before 
them.  It  is  almost  amusing  to  hear  some  of  the  advocates  of  the  Roman  theory  say- 
ing, with  Luther:  "In  this  interpretation  and  opinion  all  the  world  are  agreed,  an<l 
history  and  fact  abundantly  establish  it"  (see  Keil,  p.  245).  Desprez  is  equally  in- 
teresting when  he  says :  "  The  almost  unanimous  opinion  of  modern  criticism  is  in 
favour  of  a  separate  Median  kingdom,  distinct  from  the  united  Medo-Persian  Empire 
under  Cyrus." — Daniel  and  John,  p.  50. 


420  PRINCIPLES   OF 

whichever  interpretation  we  adopt.  The  question  at  issue  is  purely 
one  of  exegetical  accuracy  and  self -consistency:  Which  view  best 
satisfies  all  the  conditions  of  prophet,  language,  and  symbol? 

(ireat  stress  has  been  laid  by  the  advocates  of  the  Roman  theory 

upon   three  considerations:    (1)    First    they   urge  that 

favoiii*  of  the   Rome  was  too  important  to  be  left  out  of  sight  in  such 

Roman  theory.   ^  ^j^-^^^  ^f   World-empire.      "The  Roman  kingdom," 

says  Keil,  "  was  the  first  universal  monarchy  in  the  full  sense. 
Along  with  the  three  earlier  world-kingdoms,  the  nations  of  the 
world-historical  future  remained  still  unsubdued." '  But  such  pre- 
sumptions cannot  properly  be  allowed  to  weigh  at  all.  It  matters 
not  in  the  least  how  great  Rome  was,  or  how  important  a  place 
it  occupies  in  universal  history.  The  sole  question  with  the  inter- 
preter of  Daniel  must  be,  What  world-powers,  great  or  small,  fell 
Avithin  his  circle  of  prophetic  vision  ?  This  presumption  in  favour  of 
Rome  is  more  than  offset  by  the  consideration  that  geographically 
and  politically  that  later  empire  had  its  seat  and  centre  of  influ- 
ence far  aside  from  the  territory  of  the  Asiatic  kingdoms.  But 
the  Graeco-Macedonian  Empire,  in  all  its  relations  to  Israel,  and, 
indeed,  in  its  principal  component  elements,  was  an  Asiatic, 
not  a  European,  world-power.  The  pro})het,  moreover,  makes 
repeated  allusion  to  kings  of  Greece  (I  v,  Jaoan),  but  never  mentions 
Rome. 

(2)  It  is  further  argued  that  the  strong  and  terrible  character  of  the 
Iron  strength  fourth  kingdom  is  best  fulfilled  in  Rome.  No  previous 
and  violence,  dominion,  it  is  said,  was  of  such  an  iron  nature,  break- 
ing all  things  in  pieces.*  Here  again  we  must  insist  that  the  ques- 
tion is  not  so  much  whether  the  imagery  fits  Rome,  but  whether  it 
may  not  also  appropriately  depict  some  other  kingdom.  The  de- 
scription of  iron  strength  and  violence  is,  no  doubt,  aj)propriate  to 
Rome,  but  for  any  one  to  aver  that  the  conquests  and  rule  of  Alex- 
ander and  his  successors  did  not  "  break  in  pieces  and  bruise  "  (Dan. 
ii,  40),  and  trample  with  terrible  violence  the  kingdoms  of  many 
nations,  is  to  exhibit  a  marvellous  obtuseness  in  reading  the  facts 
of  history.  The  Gra?co-Macedonian  ])o\ver  broke  up  the  older  civil- 
izations, and  trampled  in  pieces  the  various  elements  of  the  Asiatic 

'  Biblical  Commentary  on  Daniel,  p.  267.     Enpli.'^h  translation.     Edinbnrgli,  1872. 

'■'  "  Neither  the  monarchy  of  Alexander,"  says  Keil  (p.  252),  "  nor  the  Javanic  world- 
kingdom  accords  with  the  iion  natiiie  of  the  fourth  kingdom,  represented  by  the  legs 
of  iron,  breaking  all  things  in  pieces,  nor  witli  the  internal  division  of  this  kingdom, 
rci>resenled  by  the  feet  consisting  partly  of  iron  and  partly  of  clay,  nor  finally  witli 
the  ten  toes  formed  of  iron  and  clay  mixed."  Such  an  assertion  from  a  commentator 
usually  so  guarded  and  trustwoithy  inclines  one  to  believe  that  its  author  was  here 
labouring  under  the  blinding  effects  of  a  foregone  conclusion. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  421 

monarchies  more  completely  than  had  ever  been  done  before. 
Rome  never  had  any  such  triumph  in  the  Orient,  and,  indeed,  no 
great  Asiatic  world-power,  comparable  for  magnitude  and  power 
with  that  of  Alexander,  ever  succeeded  his.  If  now  we  keep  in 
mind  this  utter  overthrow  and  destruction  of  the  older  dynasties 
by  Alexander,  and  then  observe  what  seems  especially  to  have 
affected  Daniel,  namely,  the  wrath  and  violence  of  the  ''little 
horn,"  and  note  how,  in  different  forms,  this  bitter  and  relent- 
less persecutor  is  made  prominent  in  this  book  (chapters  viii  and 
xi),  we  may  safely  say  that  the  conquests  of  Alexander,  and  the 
blasphemous  fury  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  in  his  violence  against 
the  chosen  j^eople,  amply  fulfilled  the  prophecies  of  the  fourth 
kingdom. 

(S)  It  is  also  claimed  that  the  Roman  theory  is  favoured  by  the 
statement,  in  chap,  ii,  44,  that  the  kingdom  of  God  should  be  set  up 
"  in  the  days  of  those  kings."  For  the  Roman  Empire,  it  is  urged, 
ruled  Palestine  when  Christ  appeared,  and  all  the  other  great  mon- 
archies had  passed  away.  But  on  what  ground  can  it  be  quietly 
assumed  that  "these  kings"  are  Roman  kings?  If  we  say  that 
they  are  kings  denoted  by  the  toes  of  the  image,  inasmuch  as  the 
stone  smote  the  image  on  the  feet  (ii,  34),  we  involve  ourselves  in 
serious  confusion.  The  Christ  appeared  when  Rome  was  in  the 
meridian  of  her  power  and  glory.  It  was  three  hundred  years 
later  when  the  empire  was  divided,  and  much  later  still  when  bro- 
ken in  pieces  and  made  to  pass  away.  But  the  stone  smote  not  the 
legs  of  iron,  but  the  feet,  which  were  partly  of  iron  and  partly  of 
clay  (ii,  33,  34).  When,  therefore,  it  is  argued  that  the  Groeco- 
Macedonian  power  had  fallen  before  the  Christ  was  born,  it  may  on 
the  other  hand  be  replied  with  greater  force  that  a  much  longer 
time  elapsed  after  the  coming  of  Christ  before  the  power  of  Rome 
was  broken  in  pieces. 

Evidently,  therefore,  no  satisfactory  conclusion  can  be  reached  as 
long  as  we  allow  oui-selves  to  be  governed  by  subjective  gy^^.g^tiyg  p^g. 
notions  of  the  import  of  minor  features  of  the  symbols,  sumptions  must 
or  by  assumptions  of  what  the  prophet  ought  to  have 
seen.  The  advocates  of  the  Roman  theory  are  continually  hiying 
stress  upon  the  sujsposed  import  of  the  tico  arms,  and  two  legs,  and 
ten  toes  of  the  image;  whereas  these  are  merely  the  natural  parts 
of  a  human  image,  and  necessary  to  complete  a  coherent  outline. 
The  prophet  lays  no  stress  upon  them  in  his  exposition,  and  it  is 
nowhere  said  that  the  image  had  ten  toes.  We  must  appeal  to  a 
closer  view  of  the  prophet's  historical  standpoint  and  his  outlying 
field  of  vision;  and  especially  should  we  study  his  visions  in  the 


42:^  PRINCIPLES    OF 

light  of  his  own  explanations  and  historical  statements,  rather  than 
from  the  narratives  of  the  Greek  historians. 

Applying  priuciijles  already  sufficiently  emphasized,  we  first  at- 
Daniei's  histor-  tend  to  Daniel's  historical  position.  At  his  first  vision 
icai  standpoint.  Nebuchadnezzar  was  reigning  in  great  splendour  (Dan. 
ii,  37,  38).  At  his  second,  Belshazzar  occupied  the  throne  of  Baby- 
Ion  (vii,  1).  This  monarch,  unknown  to  the  Greek  historians,  fills 
an  important  place  in  the  Book  of  Daniel.  He  was  slain  in  the 
flight  on  w^hich  Babylon  was  taken,  and  the  kingdom  passed  into  the 
hand  of  Darius  the  Mede  (v,  30,  31).  Whatever  we  may  think  or 
say,  Daniel  recognizes  Darius  as  the  representative  of  a  new  dy- 
nasty upon  the  throne  of  Babylon  (ix,  1).  The  prophet  held  a  high 
position  in  his  government  (vi,  2,  3),  and  during  his  reign  was  mir- 
aculously delivered  from  the  den  of  lions.  Darius  the  Mede  was  a 
^  ,  monarch  with  authority  to  issue  prolamations  "to  all 

Prominence  of  .  . 

the  Medes  in  people,  nations,  and  languages  that  dwelt  m  all  the 
Scripture.  j^^^  „  ^^^-^  25),  From  Daniel's  point  of  view,  therefore, 
the  Median  domination  of  Babylon  was  no  such  insignificant  thing 
as  many  expositors,  looking  more  to  profane  history  than  to  the 
Bible  itself,  are  wont  to  pronounce  it.  Isaiah  had  foretold  that 
Babylon  should  fall  by  the  power  of  the  Medes  (Isa.  xiii,  17; 
xxi,  2),  and  Jeremiah  had  repeated  the  prophecy  (Jer.  li,  11,  28). 
Daniel  lived  to  see  the  kingdom  pass  into  the  hands  of  Cyrus  the 
Persian,  and  in  the  third  year  of  his  reign  received  the  minute  rev- 
elation of  chapters  x  and  xi  touching  the  kings  of  Persia  and  of 
Greece.  Already,  in  the  reign  of  Belshazzar,  had  he  received  spe- 
cific revelations  of  the  kings  of  Greece  who  were  to  succeed  the 
kings  of  Media  and  Persia  (viii,  1,  21).  But  no  mention  of  any 
world-power  later  than  Greece  is  to  be  found  in  the  Book  of  Daniel. 
The  prophetic  standpoint  of  chap,  viii  is  Shushan,  the  throne-centre 
of  the  Medo-Persian  dominion,  and  long  after  the  Medes  had  ceased 
to  hold  precedence  in  the  kingdom.  All  these  things,  bearing  on 
the  historical  position  of  this  prophet,  are  to  be  constantly  kept 
in  view. 

Having  vividly  apprehended  the  historical  standpoint  of  the 
'Oi'^  varied  hut  '^^'^'^t^'"'  ^^'^  should  next  take  up  the  prophecies  which  he 
f.iiraiiei  de-  has  himself  most  clearly  explained,  and  reason  from 
-what  is  clear  to  what  is  not  clear.  In  the  explanation 
of  the  great  image  (ii,  30-45),  and  of  the  four  beasts  (vii,  17-27), 
we  find  no  mention  of  any  of  the  Avorld-i)Owers  by  name,  except 
Babylon  under  Nebuchadnezzar  (ii,  38).  But  the  description  and 
explanation  of  the  fourth  beast,  in  vii,  17-27,  correspond  so  fully 
witli  those  of  the  he-goat  in  chap,  viii  as  scarcely  to  leave  any  rea- 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  423 

sonable  ground  to  doubt  that  they  are  but  varied  portraitures  of  the 
same  great  world-power,  and  that  power  is  declared  in  the  latter 
chapter  to  be  the  Grecian  (viii,  21),  In  chap,  xi,  3  the  Grecian 
power  is  again  taken  up,  its  partly  strong  and  partly  brittle  charac- 
ter (comp.  Dan.  ii,  42)  is  exhibited,  together  with  the  attempts  of 
the  rival  kings  to  strengthen  themselves  by  intermarriage  (comp. 
ii,  43  and  xi,  6),  and  also  the  conflicts  of  these  kings,  especially 
those  between  the  Ptolemies  and  the  Seleucids.  At  verse  21  is 
introduced  the  "  vile  person  "  (nnj,  despised  or  despicable  one),  and 
the  description  through  the  rest  of  the  chapter  of  his  deceit  and 
cunning,  his  violence  and  his  sacrilegious  impiety,  is  but  a  more 
fully  detailed  picture  of  the  king  denoted  by  the  little  horn  of  chap- 
ters vii  and  viii.  As  the  repetition  of  Joseph's  and  Pharaoh's  dreams 
served  to  impress  them  the  more  intensely,  and  to  show  that  the 
things  were  established  by  God  (Gen.  xli,  32),  so  the  repetition  of 
these  prophetic  visions  under  different  forms  and  imagery  served  to 
emjihasize  their  truth  and  certainty.  There  appears  to  be  no  good 
ground  to  doubt  that  the  little  horn  of  chap,  viii,  and  the  vile  per- 
son of  chap,  xi,  21,  denoted  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  We  have  shown 
above  (pp.  410,411)  that  the  reasons  commonly  alleged  to  prove  that 
the  little  horn  of  chap,  viii  denotes  a  different  person  from  the  little 
horn  of  chap,  vii  are  superficial  and  nugatory.  It  follows,  there- 
fore, that  the  fourth  kingdom  described  in  chapters  ii,  40  ff.,  vii, 
23  ff.,  is  the  same  as  the  Grecian  kingdom  symbolized  by  the  he-goat 
in  chap.  viii.  The  repetitions  and  varied  descriptions  of  this  tre- 
mendous power  are  in  perfect  accord  with  other  analogies  of  the 
style  and  structure  of  apocalyptic  prophecy. 

If  we  have  applied  our  principles  fairly  thiis  far,  it  now  follows 
that  we  must  find  the  four  kingdoms  of  Daniel  between  The  prophet 
Nebuchadnezzar  and  Alexander  the  Great,  including  j^°g|j^  ^^  ^^_ 
these  two  monarchs.  Reasoning  and  searching  from  plain  himself. 
Daniel's  position,  and  by  the  light  of  his  own  interpretations,  we 
are  obliged  to  adopt  the  third  view  named  above,  according  to 
which  the  four  kingdoms  are,  respectively,  the  Babylonian,  the 
Median,  the  Persian,  and  the  Grseco-Macedonian.  We  have  been 
able  to  find  but  two  real  arguments  against  this  view,  namely, 
(1)  the  assumption  that  the  Median  rule  of  Babylon  was  too  insig- 
nificant to  be  thus  mentioned,  and  (2)  the  statement  of  chap,  viii, 
20  that  the  ram  denoted  the  kings  of  Media  and  Persia.  The  first 
argument  should  have  no  force  with  those  who  allow  Daniel  to  ex- 
plain himself.  He  clearly  recognizes  Darius  the  Mede  as  the  suc- 
cessor of  Belshazzar  on  the  throne  of  Babylon  (v,  31).  This 
Darius   was  "  the  son  of  Ahasuerus  of  the   seed  of  the  Medes " 


424  PRINCIPLES   OP 

(ix,  1),  and  though  he  reigned  but  two  years,  that  reign  was,  from 

the  prophet's  standpoint,  as  truly  a  new  world-power  at  Babylon  as 

if  he  had  reigned  fifty  years.     Whatever  his  relation  to  Cyrus  the 

Persian,  he  set  a  hundred  and  twenty  princes  over  his  kingdom 

(vi,  1),  and  assumed  to  issue  decrees  for  "all  people,  nations,  and 

languages  "  (vi,  25,  2G).     Most  Avriters  have  seemed  strangely  un- 

Avilling  to  allow  Daniel's  statements  as  much  weight  as  those  of  the 

Greek  historians,  who  are  notably  confused  and  unsatisfactory  in 

their  accounts  of  Cyrus  and  of  his  relations  to  the  Medes. 

The  other  argument,  namely,  that  in  chap,  viii,  20,  the  two-horned 

__  ,    ram  denotes  "  the  kins^s  of  Media  and  Persia,"  is  very 

The   prophet's  =  ta      •   i    i  •         ir 

point  of  view  properly  supposed  to  show  that  Daniel  himseli  recog- 

inDan.vTii.  nised  Medes  and  Persians  as  constituting  one  mon- 
archy. But  this  argument  is  set  aside  by  the  fact  that  the  position 
of  the  prophet  in  chap,  viii  is  Shushan  (ver.  2),  the  royal  residence 
and  capital  of  the  later  Medo-Persian  monarchy  (Neh.  i,  1;  Esther 
i,  2).  The  standpoint  of  the  vision  is  manifestly  in  the  last  period 
of  the  Persian  rule,  and  long  after  the  Median  power  at  Babylon 
had  ceased  to  exist.  The  Book  of  Esther,  written  during  this  later 
period,  uses  the  expression  "Persia  and  Media"  (Esther  i,  3,  14, 
18,  19),  thus  implying  that  Persia  then  held  the  supremacy.  The 
facts,  then,  according  to  Daniel,  are  that  a  Median  world-power 
succeeded  the  Babylonian;  but  that,  under  Cyrus  the  Persian,  it 
subsequently  lost  its  earlier  precedence,  and  Media  became  thor- 
oughly consolidated  with  Persia  into  the  one  great  empire  known 
in  other  history  as  the  Medo-Persian. 

With  this  view  all  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  readily  harmonize. 
Inner  harmony  According  to  chap.  ii,  39,  the  second  kingdom  was  in- 
I'ons  ?o  Te  ^erior  to  that  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  in  vii,  5,  it  is 
sought.  represented  by  a  bear  raised  up  on  one  side,  and  holding 

three  ribs  between  his  teeth.  It  has  no  prominence  in  the  interpre- 
tation given  by  the  prophet,  and  nothing  could  more  fitly  symbolize 
the  Median  rule  at  Babylon  than  the  image  of  a  bear,  sluggish, 
grasping,  and  devouring  what  it  has,  but  getting  nothing  more  than 
its  three  ribs,  though  loudly  called  on  to  "  arise  and  devour  much 
flesh."  No  ingenuity  of  critics  has  ever  been  able  to  make  these 
representations  of  the  second  kingdom  tally  with  the  facts  of  the 
Medo-Persian  monarchy.  Except  in  golden  splendour  this  latter 
was  in  no  sense  inferior  to  the  Babylonian,*  for  its  dominion  was 

"^  Calvin,  Aubcrlon,  and  others  think  the  Medo-Persian  was  inferior  in  moral  condi- 
tion to  the  Rabylonian.  But  surely  the  Persian  monotheism  was  far  higlver  in  point 
of  moral  and  religious  worth  than  the  polytheism  of  Babylon.  Keil  and  others  find 
the  inferiority  of  the  Medo-Persian  monarchy  in  its  want  of  inner  ituity,  the  combinO/- 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  425 

every  way  broader  and  mightier.  It  was  well  represented  by  the 
fleet  leopard  with  the  four  wings  and  four  heads  which,  like  the 
third  kingdom  of  brass,  acquired  wide  dominion  over  all  the  earth 
(comp.  ii,  39,  and  vii,  6),  but  not  by  the  sluggish,  half-reclining 
bear,  which  merely  grasped  and  held  the  ribs  put  in  its  mouth,  but 
seemed  indisposed  to  arise  and  seek  more  prey. 

Those  interpreters  who  adopt  the  second  view  above  named,  and, 
distinguishing  between  Alexander  and  his  successors,  The  Diadochoi 
make  these  latter  constitute  the  fourth  kingdom,  have  ^'^^ory. 
brought  most  weighty  and  controlling  arguments  against  the  first 
or  Roman  theory,'  showing  that  chronologically,  geographically, 
politically,  and  in  relation  to  the  Jewish  people,  the  Roman  Empire 
is  excluded  from  the  range  of  Daniel's  prophecies.  "  The  Roman 
Empire,"  says  Cowles,  "  came  into  no  important  relations  to  the 
Jews  until  the  Christian  era,  and  never  disturbed  their  repose  effect- 
ually until  A,  D.  70.  .  .  .  Rome  never  was  Asiatic,  never  was  orien- 
tal; never,  therefore,  was  a  legitimate  successor  of  the  first  three 
of  these  great  empires.  .  .  ,  Rome  had  the  seat  of  her  jDOwer  and 
the  masses  of  her  population  in  another  and  remote  part  of  the 
world." ' 

But  this  second  theory  is  unable  to  show  any  sufficient  reason  for 
dividing  the  dominion  of  Alexander  and  his  successors  ^     .  . 

'^     .     .  .  .  Dominion      of 

into  two  distinct  monarchies.  According  to  every  prop-  Alexander  and 
er  analogy  and  implication,  the  fourth  beast  with  its  ^^^  two'dwer- 
ten  horns  and  one  little  horn  of  chap,  vii,  and  the  he-  eniwurid-pow- 

Grs 

goat  with  its  one  great  horn  and  its  four  succeeding  ones, 
and  the  little  horn  out  of  one  of  these — as  presented  in  chap,  viii,  8,  9, 
21-23 — all  represent  but  one  world-power.  From  Daniel's  point  of 
vision  these  could  not  be  separated,  as  the  Median  domination  at 
Babylon  was  separated  from  the  Chaldaean  on  the  one  side,  and  the 
later  Medo-Persian  on  the  other.  It  would  be  an  unwarrantable 
confusion  of  symbols  to  make  the  horns  of  a  beast  represent  a  dif- 
ferent kingdom  fi-om  that  denoted  by  the  beast  itself.  The  two 
horns  of  the  Medo-Persian  ram  are  not  to  be  so  understood,  for  the 
Median  and  Persian  elements  are,  according  to  chap,  viii,  20,  sym- 
bolized by  the  whole  body,  not  exclusively  by  the  horns  of  the  ram, 
and  the  vision  of  the  prophet  is  from  a  standpoint  Avhere  the  Median 
tion  of  Medes  and  Persians  being  an  element  of  weakness.  But,  from  all  that  appears 
in  history,  this  combination  of  two  great  peoples  was  an  element  of  might  and  majesty 
rather  than  of  weakness  or  of  inferiority. 

'  See  Stuart's  "  Excursus  on  the  Fourth  Beast "  in  his  Commentary  on  Daniel,  pp. 
205-210.  Cowles'  Notes  on  Daniel,  pp.  354-371,  and  Zockler  on  Daniel  ii  and  vii  in 
Lange's  Biblework,  translated  and  annotated  by  Strong. 

^  Notes  on  Daniel  vii,  28,  p.  355. 


428  PRINCIPLES   OF 

and  Persian  powers  have  become  fully  consolidated  into  one  great 
empire.  If,  in  chap,  viii,  8,  9,  we  regard  the  goat  and  his  first  horn 
as  denoting  one  world-power,  and  the  four  succeeding  horns  an- 
other and  distinct  world-power,  analogy  requires  that  we  should 
also  make  the  ten  horns  of  the  fourth  beast  (vii,  7,  8,  24)  denote  a 
kino-dom  different  from  the  beast  itself.  Then,  again,  what  a  con- 
fusion  of  symbols  would  be  introduced  in  these  parallel  visions  if 
we  make  a  leopard  with  four  wings  and  four  heads  in  one  vision 
{vii,  6)  correspond  with  the  one  horn  of  a  he-goat  in  another,  and 
the  terrible  fourth  beast  of  chap,  vii,  7,  horns  and  all,  correspond 
merely  w^ith  the  horns  of  the  goat! 

From  every  point  of  view,  therefore,  we  are  driven  by  our  her- 
meneutical  principles  to  hold  that  view  of  Daniel's  four 
Conclusion.  symbolic  beasts  which  makes  them  represent,  respect- 
ively, the  Babylonian,  the  Median,  the  Medo-Persian,  and  the  Gre- 
cian domination  of  Western  Asia.  But  the  "Ancient  of  days" 
(vii,  9-12)  brought  them  into  judgment,  and  took  away  their  do- 
minion before  he  enthrcmed  the  Son  of  man  in  his  everlasting 
kingdom.  The  penal  judgment  is  represented  as  a  great  assize,  the 
books  are  opened,  and  countless  thousands  attend  the  bidding  of 
the  Judge.  The  blasphemous  beast  is  slain,  his  body  is  destroyed 
and  given  to  burning  flames,  and  his  dominion  is  rent  from  him, 
and  consumed  by  a  gradual  destruction  (verses  10,  11,  26). 

We  have  dwelt  the  longer  on  these  prophecies  because  their 
Each  book  of  proper  interpretation  is  of  fundamental  importance  in 
prophecy  to  be   jihisti-atiiio;  the  principles  by  which  we  are  to  explain 

stuaied    asa  o  i  i  J  i-ii 

whole.  other  apocalyptic  visions.     It  must  be  evident  that  a 

book  of  prophecy  should  be  studied  as  a  whole,  so  that  if  there  be 
any  marked  correlation  of  its  several  parts,  or  any  system  or  prin- 
•ciples  of  interpretation  deducible  from  comparison  and  analogy, 
they  may  be  duly  noted.  The  minor  points  should  then  be  studied 
in  the  light  of  the  whole  revelation.  It  has  been  generally  con- 
ceded that  Daniel's  prophecies  and  the  Apocalypse  of  John  have 
notable  analogies,  and  may  be  profitably  studied  in  connexion  with 
each  other.  The  same  may  be  said  of  large  portions  of  Ezekiel  and 
Zechariah.  But  we  must  not  therefore  assume  that  these  different 
prophets,  by  the  use  of  like  symbols,  all  treat  the  same  subjects, 
and  that  the  riders  on  different  coloured  horses  in  Zechariah,  and 
the  beasts  in  Daniel,  denote  the  same  things  as  the  corresponding 
symbols  in  John.  Like  symbols  must  represent  like  things,  but  not 
necessarily  the  same  things. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  437 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

OLD    TESTAMENT    APOCALYPTICS. 

Apocaltptics  is  a  theological  term  of  recent  origin  employed  in 

biblical   literature   to    designate  a   class   of    prophetic   „., ,.    , 

.       °       .  ^       '  Biblical   apoc- 

vvritings  which  refer  to  impending  or  future  judgments,  aiyptics  de- 
and  the  final  triumph  and  glory  of  the  Messianic  king-  ^^'^'^' 
dom.  Biblical  apocalyptics  is  defined  by  Liicke  as  "  the  sum  total 
(Inbegriff)  of  the  eschatological  revelations  of  the  Old  and  the  New 
Testament."'  To  this  class  we  assign  the  oracles  of  Joel,  large 
portions  of  Daniel,  Ezekiel,  and  Zechariah,  our  Lord's  eschatolog- 
ical discourse  in  Matt,  xxiv,  and  its  parallels  in  Mark  and  Luke, 
Paul's  doctrine  of  the  Parousia  in  the  Thessalonian  epistles,  and  in 
1  Cor.  XV,  and  the  Apocalypse  of  John.  The  great  theme  of  all 
these  apocalyptic  Scriptures  is  the  holy  kingdom  of  God  in  its  con- 
flict with  the  godless  and  persecuting  powers  of  the  world — a  con- 
flict in  w^hich  the  ultimate  triumph  of  righteousness  is  assured.* 

"  The  name  apocalyptic,"  says  Auberlen,  "  signifies  that  the  divine 
communication  and  revelation  are  more  prominent  in  the  prophet 
than  the  human  mediation  and  receptivity,  for  aTronaXvipig  (revela- 
tion) signifies  a  divine,  npocpTjTeia  (prophecy)  a  human  activity.  .  .  . 
The  two  expressions  are  used  as  two  distinct  sjjecies  of  one  and  the 
same  genus,  according  as  the  objective  revelation  or  the  subjective 
inspiration  is  more  prominent.     Thus  St.  Paul  distinguishes  them 

•  Versuch  einer  vollstandigen  Einleitung  in  die  OfFenbarung  des  Johannes,  p.  25. 
Second  ed.,  Bonn,  1852.  See  his  whole  chapter  entitled  Erorterung  des  Begriffs  oder 
Tbeorie  der  Apokalyptik,  pp.  1*7-39;  and  compare  Hilgenfeld,  Die  jadische  Apokaljp- 
tik,  Einleitung,  pp.  1-16  (Jena,  1857);  Dlisterdieck,  Kritisch-exegetisches  Handbiich 
uber  die  Offenbarung  Johannis,  pp.  35-46  (Gottingen,  1877);  Lange,  The  Revelation 
of  John,  pp.  1-6.     American  ed.,  New  York,  1874. 

*  The  amount  of  apocryphal  apocalyptical  literature  still  extant  is  very  large,  and 
may  be  divided  into  Jewish  and  Christian  apocalyptics.  Comp.  Liicke,  pp.  223-230. 
Much  of  it  may  be  properly  called  Jewish-Christian;  but,  altogether,  it  is  of  little 
value  in  the  elucidation  of  scriptural  prophecy,  which  holds  an  incomparable  eleva- 
tion above  it.  Liicke  and  Stuart  devote  a  considerable  part  of  their  works  on  the 
Apocalypse  to  an  account  of  these  pseudepig''aphal  books.  Bilgenfeld  (Jiidische 
Apokalyptik,  pp.  5-8)  disregards  entirely  the  distinction  between  canonical  and  apoc- 
ryphal apocalyptics,  and  treats  the  books  of  Daniel,  Enoch,  Pseudo-Ezra,  and  the 
Sibylline  Oracles  as  a  precursory  history  (Vorgeschichte)  of  Chrij^tianity.  But  most, 
if  not  all,  of  the  apocryphal  Apocalypses  (at  least  in  their  present  form)  are  posterior 
to  the  Christian  Scriptures. 


428  PRINCIPLES   OF 

in  1  Cor.  xiv,  6:  'either  by  revelation  or  by  prophecy.  ...  In 
prophecy  the  Spirit  of  God,  who  inspires  the  human  organ  of  reve- 
lation, finds  his  immediate  expression  in  words;  in  the  Apocalypse 
human  language  disappears,  for  the  reason  given  by  the  apostle 
(2  Cor.  xii,  4):  he  'heard  unsjjeakable  words  which  it  is  not  lawful 
for  a  man  to  utter.'  A  new  element  appears  here  which  cor- 
responds to  the  subjective  element  of  seeing,  the  vision.  The 
prophet's  eye  is  opened  to  look  into  the  unseen  world;  he  has  inter- 
course with  angels;  and  as  he  thus  beholds  the  unseen,  he  beholds 
also  the  future,  which  appears  to  him  embodied  in  plastic  symbolic 
shapes  as  in  a  dream,  only  that  these  images  are  not  the  children  of 
his  own  fancy,  but  the  product  of  divine  revelation  adapting  itself 
essentially  to  our  human  horizon."  ^ 

Although   apocalyptics  may  thus  be  distinguished  from   other 
prophetic  Scriptures,  the  same  hermeneutical  principles 
neuticai  priD-  are  applicable  to  them  all.     We  have  already  examined 
cipies.  most  of  the  apocalyptic  portions  of  Daniel  and  Zecha- 

riah;  it  remains  for  us  to  show  the  application  of  the  principles  we 
have  enunciated  to  other  eschatological  prophecies,  especially  those 
of  the  New  Testament.  We  find  the  same  formal  elements,"  the 
same  wealth  of  figure  and  symbol,  and  a  constant  reference  to  the 
great  day  of  the  Lord  in  the  words  of  Joel,  the  visions  of  Ezekiel, 
the  twenty-fourth  of  Matthew,  the  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians, 
the  Book  of  Revelation,  and  in  other  less  noticeable  Scriptures. 

The  Revelation  of  Joel. 
A  scientific  treatise  on  biblical  apocalyptics  should  begin  with  an 
,_,   ,   analysis  of  the  Book  of  Joel.    "  If  Joel  and  other  proph- 

IogI  the  oluGSt  XX 

formal  Apoca-  ets  had  been  secular  writers,"  says  Meyrick,  "  we  should 
'^P^*  say  that  with  Joel  originated  that  apocalyptic  literature 

which  culminated  in  the  Book  of  Revelation.  Being  what  they 
are,  we  say  that  it  pleased  God  first  to  reveal  to  Joel  that  which  he, 
in  a  similar,  though  not  in  the  same,  form  afterward  revealed  to  his 
other  prophets  respecting  the  end  of  the  world  and  the  occurrences 
which  were  to  precede  it.  The  glorious  prospect  of  a  future  bless- 
edness became  the  inheritance  of  the  Jewish  people  from  the  time  of 
Joel  onward,  and  with  it  the  terrors  of  the  day  of  judgment.  The 
prophetic  form  which  the  idea  takes  in  Joel  and  his  successors  is 
that  of  a  universal  reign  of   righteousness,  peace   and  happiness, 

'  The  Trophccios  of  Daniel  and  tlie  Revelation  of  St.  John  viewed  in  their  mutual 
Relation,  pp.  80,  S3,  84.     Eclinb.,  185G. 

'See  Lan^e,  on  the  Formal  Elements  of  Apocalyptics,  in  his  Introduction  to  the 
Revelation  of  John,  American  edition,  pp.  14-41. 


BIBLICAL   IIERMENEUTICS.  429 

under  the  visible  headship  of  Jehovah,  the  centre  of  whose  king- 
dom would  be  the  earthly  Jerusalem.  This  glorious  period  is 
to  be  inaugurated  by  a  terrible  '  day  of  the  Lord '  (itself  ushered 
in  by  signs  and  wonders  in  the  universe)  wherein,  the  Jewish  exiles 
having  been  restored,  a  judgment  will  be  pronounced  by  Jehovah 
in  solemn  assize  upon  all  the  heathen ;  and  the  foes  of  Jehovah  and 
of  his  people  Israel  will  be  exterminated.  Our  Lorci,  divesting  the 
idea,  which  Js  permanent^  of  the  form,  which  is  transitory,  declares 
to  us  that  the  '  day  of  the  Lord '  shall  come,  ushered  in  by  the  signs 
and  wonders  described  by  the  prophet;  that  he,  the  Son  of  man, 
shall  sit  upon  the  throne  of  his  glory;  that,  his  elect  having  been 
gathered  from  all  quarters,  he  shall  give  solemn  judgment  upon  all 
nations  collected  before  him;  and  that  those  who  are  his  foes,  and 
the  foes  of  his  elect,  will  be  dismissed  into  everlasting  punishment, 
while  the  righteous  ai'e  admitted  to  the  inheritance  of  the  kingdom 
prepared  for  them  from  the  foundation  of  the  world  (Matt,  xxiv— 
xxv).  St.  John,  in  like  manner,  in  his  final  apocalyptic  visions,  sees 
Joel's  vision  spiritualized — the  gathering  of  the  heathen,  the  day  of 
judgment,  the  destruction  of  the  wicked,  and  the  creation  of  the 
new  Jerusalem,  in  which  God's  people  shall  dwell  forever  around 
the  throne  of  God  and  of  the  Lamb.  .  .  .  The  dearest  hopes  and  the 
most  awful  fears  which  encourage  and  restrain  the  human  race  at 
the  present  day  were  revealed  by  God  to  the  prophet  Joel,  and 
from  his  time  onward  became  the  inheritance  of  his  Church,'" 

These  formal  elements  of  the  chief  apocalyptic  prophecies  should 
receive  our  careful  attention  as  they  appear  in  Joel.  Analysis  of  Jo- 
His  prophecy  is  arranged  in  two  leading  divisions,  eis i.rophecy. 
The  first  part  consists  of  a  twofold  revelation  of  judgment,  each 
revelation  being  accompanied  by  words  of  divine  counsel  and  prom- 
ise (chapters  i,  1-ii,  27);  the  second  part  goes  over  a  portion  of  the 
same  field  again,  but  delineates  more  clearly  the  blessings  and  tri- 
umph which  shall  accompany  the  day  of  Jehovah  (chapters  ii,  28- 
iii,  21;  Hebrew  text,  chapters  iii  and  iv).  These  two  jjarts  may 
be  properly  entitled:  (l)  JehovaKs  impending  judgments ;  (2)  Jc- 
hova/i^s  coming  triumph  and  glory.  The  first  may  again  be  sub- 
divided into  four  sections,  the  second  into  three,  as  follows: 

1.  Chap,  i,  1-12.  After  the  manner  of  Moses,  in  Exod.  x,  1-G, 
Joel  is  commissioned  to  announce  a  fourfold  plague  of  locusts. 
What  one  swarm  leaves  behind  them  another  devours  (ver.  4),  until 

'  Speaker's  Commentary,  vol.  vi,  pp.  404,  495.  Merx,  also,  though  singularly  mis- 
apprehending the  historical  standpoint  of  the  prophet  Joel,  recognizes  the  eschatolog- 
ical  and  apocalyptic  character  of  his  prophecies.  See  his  Die  Prophetic  des  Joel  und 
ihre  Ausleger,  pp.  62-78.     Halle,  1879. 


430  PRINCIPLES   OF 

all  vegetation  is  destroyed,  and  the  whole  land  is  left  in  mourning. 
This  fourfold  scourge,  as  a  beginning  of  sorrows  in  the  impending 
day  of  Jehovah,  should  be  compared  with  the  four  riders  on  differ- 
ent coloured  horses,  and  the  four  horns  of  Zech.  i,  8,  18,  the  four 
war  chariots  of  Zech.  vi,  1-8,  the  wars,  famines,  pestilences,  and 
earthquakes  of  Matt,  xxiv,  7;  Luke  xxi,  10,  11,  and  the  four  horses 
of  Rev.  vi,  1-8.  It  is  thus  a  habit  of  apocalyptics  to  represent 
punitive  judgments  in  a  fourfold  manner. 

2.  Chap,  i,  13-20.  After  the  manner  of  Jehoshaphat,  when  the 
combined  forces  of  Moab,  Ammon,  and  Seir  were  marching  against 
him  (2  Chron,  xx,  1-13),  the  prophet  calls  upon  the  priests  to 
lament,  and  proclaim  a  fast,  and  gather  the  people  in  solemn  assem- 
bly to  bewail  the  awful  day  that  is  coming  as  a  destruction  from 
Shaddai.  Under  this  head  other  features  of  the  calamity  are  inci- 
dentally mentioned,  as  the  distress  of  beast,  cattle,  and  flock,  and 
the  ravages  of  lire  (verses  18-20). 

3.  Chap,  ii,  1-11.  In  this  section  the  prophet  proclaims  the  day 
of  Jehovah  in  still  more  fearful  aspects.  Under  the  blended  ima- 
gery of  darkness,  devouring  fire,  numberless  locusts,  and  rushing 
armies  (all  which  are  represented  in  a  plague  of  locusts),'  the  earth 
and  the  heavens  are  shaken,  and  sun,  moon,  and  stars  withhold 
their  light. 

4.  Chap,  ii,  12-27.  The  second  portrayal  of  the  great  and  terri- 
ble day  is  in  turn  followed  by  another  call  to  penitence,  fasting, 
and  prayer,  and  also  the  promise  of  deliverance  and  glorious  recom- 
pense. So  the  double  proclamation  of  judgment  has  for  each 
announcement  a  corresponding  word  of  counsel  and  hope. 

The  second  part  of  the  prophecy  is  distinguished  by  the  words, 
"  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  afterward  "  (p'nnx  ^^^y})),  a  formula  which 

'An  eyewitness  of  a  plague  of  locusts,  which  visited  Palestine  in  1866,  says: 
"From  early  morning  till  near  sunset  the  locusts  passed  over  the  city  in  countless 
hosts,  as  though  all  the  swarms  in  the  world  were  let  loose,  and  the  whirl  of  their 
wings  was  as  the  sound  of  chariots.  At  times  they  appeared  in  the  air  like  some 
great  snowdrift,  obscuring  the  sun,  and  casting  a  shadow  upon  the  earth.  Men  stood 
in  the  streets  and  looked  up,  and  their  faces  gathered  blackness.  At  intervals  those 
wliich  were  tired  or  hungry  descended  on  the  little  gardens  in  the  city,  and  in  an  in- 
credibly short  time  all  that  was  green  disappeared.  Tliey  ran  up  the  walls,  they 
sought  out  every  blade  of  grass  or  weed  growing  between  the  stones,  and  after  eat- 
ing to  satiety,  tiiey  gathered  in  their  ranks  along  the  ground,  or  on  the  tops  of  the 
houses.  It  is  no  marvel  that  as  Pharaoh  looked  at  tliem  he  called  them  'this  death' 
(Exod.  X,  17).  .  .  .  One  locust  has  been  found  near  Bethlehem  measuring  more  than 
five  inches  in  length.  It  is  covered  with  a  hard  shell,  ami  has  a  tail  like  a  scorpion." 
— Journal  of  Sacred  Literature  for  18GG,  p.  89.  Compare  the  same  Journal  for 
1865,  pp.  •235-23'7. 


BIBLICAL   HERMEiNEUTICS.  431 

may  be  regarded  as  equivalent  to  D''Djn  ri"'"inX3,  la  the  end  of  the  daySy 
or,  in  the  last  days. 

1.  Chap,  ii,  28-32  (Hebrew  text,  chap.  iii).  In  accordance  with 
the  prayer  of  Moses  (Num.  xi,  29),  Jehovah  promises  a  great  out- 
pouring of  his  Spirit  upon  all  the  people,  so  that  all  will  become 
prophets.  This  token  of  grace  is  followed  by  wonders  in  heaven 
and  earth  (D''nsiO,  p'^odigioits  signs,  like  the  plagues  of  Egypt) : 

And  I  will  give  wonders  in  the  heavens  and  in  the  land, 

Blood,  and  fire,  and  columns  of  smoke ; 

The  sun  shall  be  turned  to  darkness, 

And  the  moon  to  blood, 

Before  the  coming  of  the  day  of  Jehovah — 

The  great  and  the  terrible. 

And  it  shall  come  to  pass  that  all  who  call  upon  the  name 

of  Jehovah  shall  be  saved. 
For  in  Mount  Zion  and  in  Jerusalem  shall  be  deliverance, 
As  Jehovah  has  said, 
And  in  the  remnant  whom  Jehovah  calls. 

2.  Chap,  iii,  1-1 7  (Ileb.  iv,  1-17).  The  great  day  of  Jehovah  will 
issue  in  a  judgment  of  all  nations  (comp.  Matt,  xxv,  31-46).  Like 
the  combined  armies  of  Moab,  Ammon,  and  Seir,  which  came  against 
Judah  and  Jerusalem  in  the  time  of  Jehoshaphat,  the  hostile  nations 
shall  be  brought  down  into  "  a  valley  of  Jehoshaphat "  (verses  2, 
12),  and  there  be  recompensed  according  as  they  had  recompensed 
Jehovah  and  his  people  (comp.  Matt,  xxv,  41-46). 

Multitudes,  multitudes  in  the  valley  of  judgment! 

For  near  is  the  day  of  Jehovah, 

In  the  valley  of  judgment  (ver.  14). 

Jehovah,  who  dwells  in  Zion,  will  make  that  valley — a  valley  of 
judgment  to  his  enemies — like  another  valley  of  blessing  to  his 
people.     Coinp.  2  Chron.  xx,  20-26. 

3.  Chap,  iii,  18-21  (Ileb.  iv,  18-21).  The  judgment  of  the  na- 
tions shall  be  followed  by  a  perpetual  peace  and  glory  like  the 
composure  and  rest  which  God  gave  the  realm  of  Jehoshaphat 
(2  Chron.  xx,  30).  The  figures  of  great  plenty,  the  flowing  waters, 
the  fountain  proceeding  from  the  house  of  Jehovah,  Judah  and 
Jerusalem  abiding  forever,  and  "  Jehovah  dwelling  in  Zion,"  arc 
in  substance  equivalent  to  the  closing  chapters  of  Ezekiel  and  John. 

Thus  this  oldest  Apocalypse  virtually  assumes  a  sevenfold  struc- 
ture, and  repeats  its  revelations  in  various  forms.  The  first  four 
sections   refer  to  a  day  of  Jehovah  near  at  hand,   an   impending 


433  PRINCIPLES 


OF        \ 


judgment,  of   whicli  the  locust  scourge  had,  perhaps,  already  ap- 
peared as  the  heoiiiiiiiit^  of  sorrows;  the  last  three  stand 

Joel's  prophecy    ^  .  '^     ^.  ^  ,\  ,  ,, 

agenericApoc-  out  ui  the  more  distant  future  (afterward  =  the  last 
aiypse.  days.  Acts  ii,  17).     The  allusions  of  the  book  to  events 

of  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat  have  led  most  critics  to  believe  that 
Joel  prophesied  soon  after  the  days  of  that  monarch,  but  beyond 
those  allusions  this  ancient  prophet  is  unknown.  The  absence  of  any 
thing  to  determine  his  historical  standpoint,  and  the  far-reaching 
import  of  his  words,  render  his  oracles  a  kind  of  generic  prophecy 
capable  of  manifold  applications. 

Ezekiel's  Visions, 

The  numerous  parallels  between  the  Book  of  Ezekiel  and  the 
Peculiarities  of  Revelation  of  John  have  arrested  the  attention  of  all 
Ezekiel.  readers.'    But  the  number  and  extent  of  Ezekiel's  proph- 

ecies carry  him  over  a  broader  field  than  that  of  any  other  apoca- 
lyptic seer,  so  that  he  combines  vision,  symbolico-typical  action, 
parable,  allegory,  and  formal  prophesying.  "  Ezekiel's  style  of 
prophetic  representation,"  says  Keil,  "  has  many  peculiarities.  In 
the  first  place  the  clothing  of  symbol  and  allegory  prevails  in  him 
to  a  greater  degree  than  in  all  the  other  prophets;  and  his  symbol- 
ism and  allegory  are  not  confined  to  general  outlines  and  pictures, 
but  elaborated  in  the  minutest  details,  so  as  to  present  figures  of  a 
boldness  surpassing  reality,  and  ideal  representations,  which  pro- 
duce an  impression  of  imposing  grandeur  and  exuberant  fulness.' 

Ezekiel's  prophecies,  like  Joel's,  may  be  divided  into  two  parts: 

,   the  first  (chapters  i-xxxii)  announcing  Jehovah's  iudff- 

Analysis    of  ^        ^  '  t?  _  j      » 

Ezekiel's proph-  ments  upon  Israel  and  the  heathen  nations;  the  second 
*°^^^'  (chapiters  xxxiii-xlviii)  announcing  the  restoration  and 

final  glorification  of  Israel.  The  first  part,  however,  is  not  without 
gracious  words  of  promise  (xi,  13-20;  xvii,  22-24),  and  the  second 
contains  the  fearful  judgment  of  God  (xxxvii,  xxxviii)  after  the  man- 
ner of  the  judgment  of  all  nations  described  in  the  second  part  of 
Joel  (iii,  2-14).  The  first  part  of  Ezekiel  may  be  subdivided  into 
seven  sections,  the  second  part  into  three,  as  follows: 

1.  Chapters  i-iii,  14.  The  opening  vision  is  threefold,  consist- 
Tiie  opening  i"g  of  the  living  creatures,  the  -wheels,  and  the  throne 
vision.  Qf  Jehovah.     The  symbolic  parts  of  this  vision  embody 

the  substance  of  all  the  subsequent  prophecies.  The  fourfold  Avheel, 
like  tlie  horsemen,  the  horns,  the  smiths,  and  the  chariots  in  Zech. 

'  See  a  list  of  parallels  between  Ezekiel,  Daniel,  Zechariah,  and  John  in  the  Speak- 
er's Cominentiiry  on  Ezekiel,  pp.  12-10. 

'^  Biblieni  (Jonimentary  on  the  Prophecies  of  Ezekiel,  vol.  i,  p.  9.     Edinb.,  1870. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  433 

i,  10,  19,  21;  vi,  5,  and  the  four  horses  and  their  riders  in  Rev.  vi, 
2-8,  represent  the  potent  agencies  of  divine  judgment.  Whether 
these  go  forth  against  rebellious  Israel  or  against  the  heathen,  they 
move  at  the  will  and  command  of  the  cherubim.  So  in  Rev.  vi, 
the  symbols  of  conquest,  bloodshed,  famine,  and  aggravated  mor- 
tality proceed  on  their  solemn  mission  only  as  the  cherubim  say 
Come.  Here  is  a  profound  intimation  that  all  things  work  together 
for  good  to  them  who  love  God,  and  who  are,  accordingly,  predes- 
tined to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son,  and  to  be  sanctified 
in  his  glory  (Rom.  viii,  28-30;  comp.  Exod.  xxix,  48).  For  if  the 
cherubim  are  prophetic  symbols  of  redeemed  and  glorified  human- 
ity (see  above,  p.  363)  this  vision  suggests  that  every  agency  of 
providence  or  judgment  in  all  the  world  moves  with  a  foreseen 
(irposyvG),  Rom.  viii,  29;  xi,  2;  comp.  1  Peter  i,  1,  2)  vital  relation 
to  the  ultimate  glory  of  God's  elect.  The  vision  was  followed  by 
the  divine  call  and  commission  of  the  prophet. 

2.  Chapters  iii,  15-vii  describe  the  further  commission  of  the 
prophet,  and  contain  his  first  series  of  symbolico-typical  and  orac- 
ular announcements  of  the  approaching  woes  and  desolation  of 
Jerusalem. 

3.  Chapters  viii-xi.  The  prophet  is  carried  in  vision  to  Jerusa- 
lem, and  there  beholds  a  fourfold  picture  of  the  idolatrous  abomi- 
nations which  constituted  Judah's  guilt  and  shame.  This  vision 
was  followed  by  that  of  the  seven  angels,  six  of  whom  were  com- 
manded to  go  through  the  city  and  smite  all  who  had  not  the  mark 
of  God  upon  their  foreheads  (comp.  Rev.  vii,  3 ;  ix,  4,  and  the  seven 
trumpet  angels  of  Rev.  viii,  2).  One  of  the  angels  takes  fire  from 
between  the  wheels  under  the  cherubim,  and  scatters  it  over  the 
city  (comp.  Rev.  viii,  5),  after  which  the  cherubim  depart  from  the 
temple  and  the  city,  and  with  it  that  series  of  visions  ends  (xi,  24). 

4.  Chapters  xii-xix  belong  to  the  cycle  of  prophecies  which  are 
dated  in  the  sixth  year  (viii,  1),  but  the  standpoint  of  the  prophet 
is  changed,  and  he  appears  among  the  captives  in  Chaldaea,  and  by 
symbolico-typical  action,  allegory,  parable,  lamentation,  and  vari- 
ous expostulation  and  warning  he  exhibits  the  sins  of  Israel,  and 
shows  that  rebellion  against  God  is  sure  to  bring  misery  and  de- 
struction upon  the  transgressors. 

5.  Chapters  xx-xxiii  contain  the  prophecies  of  the  seventh  year, 
and  repeat  in  other  words  and  figures  the  catalogue  of  Israel's  sins. 
"The  same  subject  is  continued,"  says  Fairbairn,  "though,  as  the 
time  of  judgment  had  approached  nearer,  the;re  is  an  increased 
keenness  and  severity  in  the  prophet's  tone;  he  sits,  as  it  were,  in 
judgment  upon  the  people,  brings  out  in   full    form   the  divine 

28 


434  PRINCIPLES   OP 

indictment  against  them,  and  with  awful  distinctness  and  frequent 
reiteration  announces  both  their  consummate  guilt  and  its  appro- 
priate judgment."' 

6.  Chap,  xxiv  bears  the  date  of  the  memorable  day  on  Avhicli 
Nebuchadnezzar  commenced  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  and  under  the 
figure  of  a  boiling  pot  depicts  the  fearful  ruin  that  was  then  about 
to  fall  upon  the  city.  In  the  evening  of  that  day  the  prophet's 
wife,  the  desire  of  his  eyes,  was  removed  by  death,  and  he  was 
commanded  not  to  mourn  or  weep,  that  he  might  be  a  sign  to  Israel 
of  a  grief  too  deep  for  tears  (comp.  Jer.  xvi,  4-6). 

7.  Chapters  xxv-xxxii  are  a  series  of  seven  oracles '  against  so 
many  different  heathen  nations,  namely,  (1)  the  Ammonites,  (2)  Moab, 
(3)  Edom,  (4)  the  Philistines,  (5)  Tyre,  (6)  Sidon,  and  (7)  Egypt. 
"  These  seven  nations,"  observes  Currey,  "  are  all  mentioned  by  Jer- 
emiah (xxv,  15-32)  as  bidden  to  drink  of  the  cup  of  the  fury  of  the 
Lord;  for  five  of  them  (Egyjit  and  Philistia  being  excepted)  Jere- 
miah was  to  make  bonds  and  yokes  (Jer.  xxvii,  3).  In  prophesying 
against  foreign  nations  the  more  recent  prophets  often  adopt  the 
language  of  those  who  preceded  them."  ^ 

The  second  part  of  Ezekiel's  prophecies  is  full  of  consolation  and 
hope  for  the  house  of  Israel.  As  in  the  opening  vision,  the  dark 
cloud  out  of  the  north  had  a  circle  of  brightness  about  it  (i,  4),  and 
the  fiery  human  likeness  of  the  glory  of  Jehovah  was  encompassed 
by  the  appearance  of  a  rainbow  (i,  28),  so  the  punitive  judgments 
of  God,  if  not  themselves  blessings  in  disguise,  are  compassed  with 
radiations  of  divine  mercy,  and  are  the  agencies  of  holy  love  w^hich 
either  chastens  to  reform,  or  punishes  with  death  to  secure  the  final 
peace  and  glory  of  Messiah's  kingdom. 

I.  Chapters  xxxiii-xxxvii  abound  in  consolation  and  hope  for  the 
Prophecies  of  chosen  people.  After  the  renewal  of  the  prophet's 
restoration.  charge,  which  occurred  on  the  day  in  which  he  heard 
of  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  (xxxiii,  21),  the  word  of  Jehovah  through 
him  announces  the  restoration  of  Israel  in  six  different  forms. 
(I)  As  an  offset  to  the  work  of  the  unfaithful  shepherds  who  had 
caused  the  flock  to  be  scattered  abroad,  Jehovah,  like  a  good  shep- 
herd, will  seek  his  scattered  sheep,  and  lead  them  into  rich  pastures 

'Ezekiel  and  the  Book  of  his  Prophecy,  p.  14.     Edinburjrh,  1855. 

"  These  oracles  aj^aiiist  the  seven  nations  are,  perhaps,  stifficiontly  distinct  to  be  re- 
garded as  a  Icadinj^  section  by  themselves.  In  that  case  we  should  subdivide  the  fiist 
half  of  Ezekiel's  prophecies  into  two  leading  parts,  the  first  (chapters  i-xxiv)  against 
idolatrous  Israel,  consisting  of  six  subdivisions  as  above,  the  second  (chapters  xxv- 
xxxii)  against  the  heatlien,  and  consisting  of  seven  subdivisions. 

*  Speaker's  Conuiientary  on  Ezekiel,  p.  106. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  435 

upon  the  mountains  of  Israel  (chap,  xxxiv).  (2)  As  an  offset  to  the 
evils  Israel  suffered  from  the  surrounding  nations,  the  doom  of 
Edom  is  foretold  as  a  specimen  of  the  manner  in  which  Jehovah 
Avill  avenge  his  people  on  their  heartless  enemies  (chap.  xxxv). 
(3)  As  an  offset  to  the  prophecy  against  the  mountains  of  Israel,  in 
chap,  vi,  1-7,  there  now  comes  a  promise  to  restore  and  beautify  all 
that  was  laid  waste  (xxxvi,  1-15).  (4)  Thereupon  follows  the  pledge 
of  multiplied  blessings  to  be  showered  upon  the  restored  house  of 
Israel  (xxxvi,  16-38),  and  the  section  closes  with  the  two  symbol- 
ical signs  (5)  of  the  resurrection  of  dry  bones  (xxxvii,  1-14),  and 
(6)  of  the  two  rods  of  wood  [y]})  which  represented  the  divided 
kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Judah  (xxxvii,  15-28).  These  symbols 
declared  that  Israel's  restoration  should  be  as  life  from  the  dead, 
and  should  result  in  their  becoming  one  nation  again  upon  the 
mountains  of  Israel. 

2,  Chapters  xxxviii  and  xxxix  contain  the  great  apocalyptic  pic- 
The  battle  of  ture  of  the  last  conflict  of  the  world  with  God.  This 
^°s-  section  has  four  subdivisions:   (1)  The  gathering  of  the 

army  of  Gog  and  their  march  against  Israel  (xxxviii,  1-13);  (2)  His 
fearful  overthrow  by  the  power  of  God  (verses  14-23);  (3)  Another 
portraiture  of  the  utter  destruction  of  all  the  multitudes  of  Gog 
xxxix,  1-16);  (4)  The  issue  of  this  final  victory  in  the  sanctifica- 
tion  and  glory  of  the  house  of  Israel  (verses  17-29).  On  this  mys- 
terious prophecy  Currey  appropriately  remarks:  "  We  must  bear  in 
mind  that  Ezekiel  is  not  predicting  the  invasion  of  an  actual  array, 
but  the  advance  of  evil  under  that  figure.  So  he  declares  the  over- 
throw of  evil  by  the  figure  of  a  host  routed  and  slain,  and  the  con- 
sequent purification  of  a  land  partially  overrun  and  disturbed.  It 
is  the  manner  of  Ezekiel  to  dwell  upon  the  details  of  the  figurative 
acts  which  he  portrays,  bnnging  them  before  the  mind  as  vivid 
pictures,  and  employing,  so  to  speak,  the  strongest  colouring.  This 
has  led  some  so  to  rest  on  the  picture  as  to  forget  that  it  is  a  figure. 
Thus  they  have  searched  history  to  find  out  some  campaign  in  the 
land  of  Israel,  some  overthrow  of  invaders,  on  which  to  fix  this 
prophecy,  and  have  assigned  localities  to  the  burial  place,  and  even 
thought  to  discover  the  spot  to  which  belongs  the  appellation 
Hamon-Gog.  But  in  truth  the  details  are  set  forth  in  order  to 
carry  out  the  allegory,  and  their  very  extravagance,  so  to  speak, 
points  out  that  we  have  but  the  shadow  of  a  great  spiritual  real- 
ity which  man  can  only  faintly  represent  and  feebly  grasp  in  a 
figure." ' 

(3)  Chapters  xl-xlviii  contain  an  elaborate  vision  of  the  kingdom 
Speaker's  Commentary  on  Ezekiel,  p.  158. 


436  PRINCIPLES   OF 

of  God,  and  is  the  Old  Testament  counterpart  of  the  new  heaven 
and  new  land  portrayed  in  Rev.  xxi  and  xxii.     Ezekiel 

The  new  tern-    .  .     -,    .         ,  •   •  /•    /-«     i    ^  i  •    i 

pie,  land,  and  IS  carried  in  the  visions  ot  Grod  to  a  very  high  moiin- 
''"^'  tain  in  the  land  of  Israel  (xl,  2;  comp.  Rev.  xxi,  10)  and 

sees  a  new  temple,  new  ordinances  of  worship,  a  river  of  waters  of 
life,  new  land  and  new  tribal  divisions,  and  a  new  city  named  Je- 
HOVAii-SHAMMAH.  The  minutciiess  of  detail  is  characteristic  of 
Ezekiel,  and  no  one  would  so  naturally  have  portrayed  the  Messi- 
anic times  under  the  imagery  of  a  glorified  Judaism  as  a  prophet 
who  was  himself  a  priest.  From  his  historical  standpoint,  as  an 
exile  by  the  rivers  of  Babylon,  smitten  with  grief  as  he  remembered 
Zion,  and  the  ruined  city  and  temple,  and  the  desolated  land  of 
Canaan  (comp.  Psa.  cxxxvii),  no  ideal  of  restoration  and  glory  could 
be  more  attractive  and  pleasing  than  that  of  a  perfect  temple,  a 
continual  service,  a  holy  priesthood,  a  restored  city,  and  a  land  com- 
pletely occupied  and  watered  by  a  never-failing  river  that  would 
make  the  deserts  blossom  as  the  rose. 

Three  different  interpretations  of  these  closing  chapters  of  Eze- 
iiiterpretation    kiel  have  been  maintained,     (1)  The  first  regards  this 

of  the  closing    (description  of  the  temple  as  a  model  of  the  temple  of 

vision  of  Eze-  r  r  i 

kiej.  Solomon  which  was  destroyed  by  the  Chaldfeans.     The 

advocates  of  this  view  suppose  that  the  prophet  designed  this  pat- 
tern to  serve  in  the  rebuilding  of  the  house  of  God  after  the  return 
of  the  Jews  from  their  exile.  (2)  Another  class  of  interpreters  hold 
that  this  whole  passage  is  a  literal  prophecy  of  the  final  restoration 
of  the  Jews.  At  the  second  coming  of  Christ  all  Israel  will  be  gath- 
ei'ed  out  from  among  the  nations,  become  established  in  their  an- 
cient land  of  promise,  rebuild  their  temple  after  this  glorious  model, 
and  dwell  in  tribal  divisions  according  to  the  literal  statements  of 
this  prophecy.  (3)  That  exposition  which  has  been  maintained 
probably  by  the  majority  of  evangelical  divines  may  be  called  the 
figurative  or  symbolico-typical.  The  vision  is  a  Levitico-prophetic 
picture  of  the  New  Testament  Church  or  kingdom  of  God.  Its 
general  import  is  thus  set  forth  by  Keil:  "The  tribes  of  Israel 
wiiich  receive  Canaan  for  a  })erpetual  possession  are  not  the  Jewish 
people  converted  to  Christ,  but  the  Israel  of  God,  i.  e.,  the  people 
of  God  of  the  new  covenant  gathered  from  among  both  Jews  and 
Gentiles;  and  that  Canaan  in  which  they  are  to  dwell  is  not  the 
earthly  Canaan  or  Palestine  between  the  Jordan  and  the  Mediterra- 
nean Sea,  but  the  New  Testament  Canaan,  the  territory  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  whose  boundaries  reach  from  sea  to  sea,  and  from 
the  river  to  the  ends  of  the  earth.  And  the  temple  upon  a  very 
high  mountain  in  the  midst  of  this  Canaan  in  which  the  Lord  is 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  437 

enthroned,  and  causes  the  river  of  the  water  of  life  to  flow  down 
from  his  throne  over  his  kingdom,  so  that  the  earth  produces  the 
tree  of  life  with  leaves  as  medicine  for  men,  and  the  Dead  Sea  is 
filled  with  fishes  and  living  creatures,  is  a  figurative  representation 
and  type  of  the  gracious  presence  of  the  Lord  in  his  Church,  whicli 
is  realized,  in  the  present  period  of  the  earthly  development  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  in  the  form  of  the  Christian  Church,  in  a  spir- 
itual and  invisible  manner,  in  the  indwelling  of  the  Father  and  the 
Son  through  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  hearts  of  believers,  and  in  a 
spiritual  and  invisible  opei-ation  in  the  Church,  but  which  will 
eventually  manifest  itself  when  our  Lord  shall  appear  in  the  glory 
of  the  Father  to  translate  his  Church  into  the  kingdom  of  glory  in 
such  a  manner  that  we  shall  see  the  Almighty  God  and  the  Lamb 
with  the  eyes  of  our  glorified  body,  and  worship  before  his  throne."  ' 

This  symbolico-typical  interpretation  recognizes  a  harmony  of 
Ezekiel's  method  and  style  with  other  apocalyptic  representations 
of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  finds  in  this  fact  a  strong  argument 
in  its  favour.  The  measurements  recorded,  the  ideal  character  of 
the  tribe  divisions,  and  especially  the  river  of  healing  waters  flow- 
ing from  the  threshold  of  the  temple  into  the  eastern  sea,  are  insu- 
perable difiiculties  in  the  way  of  any  literal  exposition  of  the  vision. 
The  modern  chiliastic  notion  of  a  future  return  of  the  Jews  to  Pal- 
estine, and  a  revival  of  the  Old  Testament  sacrificial  worship,  is 
opposed  to  the  entire  genius  and  spirit  of  the  Gospel  dispensation." 

The  illustrations  now  given  of  the  artistic  structure  of  Old  Test- 
ament apocalyptics  should  be  kept  in  mind  and  utilized  Ai-tistic  struc- 
in  the  study  of  the  eschatological  portions  of  the  New  fy^^^^^  io°*be 
Testament.  The  habit  of  repeating  prophetic  pictures,  noted. 
like  Pharaoh's  dreams  and  Daniel's  visions,  under  various  forms, 
the  abundance  of  imagery,  and  the  highly  metaphorical  style  of 
predictions  of  falling  empires,  should  be  particularly  studied.  A 
failure  to  observe  these  formal  elements  has  been  one  chief  cause 
of  the  numerous  conflicting  expositions  of  this  class  of  Scriptures. 
That  certainly  would  be  an  untrustworthy  method  which,  in  the 
interpretation  of  the  New  Testament,  insists  on  the  literal  import 
of  language  which,  in  the  Old  Testament,  is  authoritatively  shown 
to  be  figurative. 

'  Biblical  Commentary  on  the  Prophecies  of  Ezekiel,  vol.  ii,  p.  425.     Edinb.,  187G. 

*  For  extended  arguments  in  favour  of  the  symbolico-typical,  and  against  the  literal, 
interpretation  of  Ezek.  xl-xlviii,  see  the  commentaries  on  this  prophet  by  Fairbairn, 
Schroeder,  Cowles,  and  Carrey. 


438  PRINCIPLES   OF 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 

THE    GOSPEL    APOCALYPSE. 

Our  Lord's  eschatological  discourse  in  Matt,  xxiv  (and  the  parallel 
])assages  of  Mark  and  Luke)  may  be  appropriately  called  the  apoca- 
lypse of  the  Gospels.'    It  was  uttered  in  connexion  with 

Occasion  of  Je-      •'  ^  ^       .      . 

siis'  apocaiyp-  his  terrible  denunciation  of  Jerusalem,  the  murderess 
tic  discourse.  ^^  prophets  (Matt,  xxiii,  34-39).  The  disciples  were 
awestruck  by  his  words,  and  as  he  took  his  departure  from  the 
temple  they  called  his  attention  to  the  magnificent  buildings  and 
great  stones  ;  but  this  only  drew  from  liim  the  further  remark  : 
"  Days  will  come,  in  which  there  shall  not  be  left  stone  upon  stone 
here,  which  shall  not  be  thrown  down"  (Luke  xxi,  6).  He  passed 
out  of  the  city,  and  sat  down  upon  the  Mount  of  Olives  opposite 
the  temple,  when  four  of  the  disciples  (Peter,  James,  John,  and 
Andrew)  asked  him  privately  (Mark  xiii,  3,  4) :  *'  Tell  us  when 
these  things  shall  be,  and  what  the  sign  when  these  things  are  all 
about  to  be  accomplished?"  Luke  (xxi,  7)  records  their  inquiry  in 
nearly  the  same  words,  but  according  to  Matthew  (xxiv,  3)  they 
asked :  "  Tell  us  when  these  things  shall  be,  and  what  is  the  sign 
of  thy  coming  (rij^  orjg  rrapovoiag)  and  of  the  completion  of  the 
age  "  (avvTeXelag  rov  alcbvog)  ?  Let  it  be  noted,  then,  that  our  Lord's 
apocalyptic  semion  on  the  Mount  of  Olives  was  in  answer  to  this 
question  of  his  disciples,  and  with  explicit  reference  to  the  over- 
throw of  the  temple  and  the  fall  of  Jerusalem. 

But  although  the  occasion  and  scope  of  this  discourse  are  so 
clearly  defined,  and  our  Lord  himself  declared  emphatically,  in  an- 
swer to  the  disciples'  question,  "This  generation  shall  not  pass 
away  until  all  these  things  be  accomplished  "  (Matt,  xxiv,  34  ;  Mark 
Various  opin-  ^iiij  30;  Luke  xxi,  32  ;  comp.  Matt,  xvi,  28;  Mark  ix,  1 ; 
'°"=*-  Luke  ix,  27),  a  large  number  of  expositors  insist  that 

oven  now,  after  a  lapse  of  nearly  two  thousand  years,  the  prophecy 

'  This  designation  is  justified  by  the  subject  matter  of  the  discourse,  and  its  formal 
reference  to  his  coming  and  the  end  of  the  age.  But  it  lacks  some  of  the  formal 
elements  of  biblical  apocalyptics,  and  for  the  obvious  reason  that  it  became  this 
Teacher  and  Prophet  from  heaven  to  speak  unlike  those  who  received  their  revela- 
tions by  vision  or  dream.  So.  far,  however,  as  he  uses  the  tone  and  style  of  apoca- 
lyptic i)rophecy,  we  should  interi)ret  his  language  by  the  same  hermeneutical  principles 
which  we  apply  to  other  revelations. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  439 

remains  in  great  part  unfulfilled.  It  is  quite  generally  admitted 
that  Matt,  xxiv,  1-28  refers  to  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  but  the  lan- 
guage of  verses  29-31  is  supposed  to  be  incompatible  with  that 
event,  and  to  refer  to  a  future  literal  coming  of  Christ  in  the  clouds 
of  heaven.  Some,  however,  find  the  transition  from  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem  to  the  end  of  the  world  at  verse  35  (E.  J.  Meyer), 
others  at  verse  36  (Doddridge),  others  at  verse  43  (Kuinoel),  while 
others  find  it  in  chap,  xxv,  14  (Eichhorn),  and  others  in  chap,  xxv,  31 
(Wetstein),'  Another  class  of  interpreters  (Stier,  Alford)  apply 
the  theory  of  a  double  sense  to  the  whole  chapter,  and  teach  that 
our  Lord  referred  primarily  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  but 
only  as  to  a  type  of  the  end  of  the  world  and  the  final  judgment. 
"Two  parallel  interpretations,"  says  Alford,  "run  through  the  for- 
mer part  as  far  as  verse  28,  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the 
final  judgment  being  both  enwrapped  in  the  words,  but  the  former, 
in  this  part  of  the  chapter,  predominating.  From  verse  28,  the  lesser 
subject  begins  to  be  SM^allowed  up  by  the  greater,  and  our  Lord's 
second  coming  is  the  predominant  theme,  with,  however,  certain 
hints  thrown  back  as  it  were  at  the  event  which  was  immedi- 
ately in  question;  till,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  chapter,  and  the 
whole  of  the  next,  the  second  advent,  and  at  last  the  final  judgment 
ensuing  on  it,  are  the  subjects." " 

Lange's  outline  of  this  sublime  prophecy  of  our  Lord  is  as  fol- 
lows :  "  In  harmony  with  apocalyptical  style,  he  exhib-  Lange's  anaiy- 
ited  the  judgments  of  his  coming  in  a  sei'ies  of  cycles,  sis  of  chapters 
each  of  which  depicts  the  whole  futurity,  but  in  such  a  ^^^  ^°*^  ^^^' 
manner  that  with  every  new  cycle  the  scene  seems  to  approximate 
to  and  more  closely  resemble  the  final  catastrophe.  Thus,  the  first 
<?ycle  delineates  the  whole  course  of  the  world  down  to  the  end,  in 
its  general  characteristics  (chap,  xxiv,  4-14).  The  second  gives  the 
signs  of  the  approaching  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  paints  this 
destruction  itself  as  a  sign  and  a  commencement  of  the  judgment 
of  the  world,  which  from  that  day  onward  proceeds  in  silent  and 
suppressed  days  of  judgment  down  to  the  last  (vers.  15-28),     The 

'  The  position  taken  by  some  that  it  was  one  great  purpose  of  Jesus,  in  answering 
his  disciples'  question,  to  warn  them  against  confounding  Jerusalem's  destruction 
with  the  end  of  the  world  can  scarcely  be  made  out  of  a  strict  interpretation  of 
our  Lord's  words.  He  clearly  warned  them  against  deceivers  and  false  Christs 
who  would  appear  before  the  end.  But  we  can  find  no  word  or  sentence  which 
appears  designed  to  impress  any  one  with  the  idea  that  the  destruction  in  question 
and  the  parousia  would  be  far  separate  as  to  time.  The  one,  it  is  said,  will  im- 
mediately follow  the  other,  and  all  will  take  place  before  that  generation  shall  pass 
away. 

^  Greek  Testament  on  Matt,  xxiv,  1,  2. 


440  PRINCIPLES  OF 

third  describes  the  sudden  end  of  the  world,  and  the  judgment 
which  ensues  (vers.  29-44:).'  Then  follows  a  series  of  parables  and 
similitudes,  in  which  the  Lord  paints  the  judgment  itself,  which 
unfolds  itself  in  an  organic  succession  of  several  acts.  In  the  last 
act  Christ  reveals  his  universal  judicial  majesty.  Chap,  xxiv,  45-51,. 
exhibits  the  judgment  uj^on  the  servants  of  Christ,  or  the  clergy. 
Chap.  XXV,  1-13,  (the  wise  and  foolish  virgins)  exhibits  the  judg- 
ment upon  the  Church,  or  the  people.  Then  follows  the  judgment 
upon  individual  members  of  the  Church  (14-30).  Finally,  verses 
31-46  introduce  the  universal  judgment  of  the  world.'" 

In  view  of  the  various  opinions  of  this  important  prophecy  one 
may  well  approach  the  investigation  of  it  with  great  reserve.  All 
dogmatic  assumptions  and  prepossessions  should  be  set  aside,  and 
the  entire  passage  should  be  studied  with  strict  regard  to  the  con- 
text, scope,  and  plan. 

The  prophecy,  as  we  have  seen,  was  uttered  in  reply  to  the 
The  question  of  question  of  the  disciples,  as  given  in  Matt,  xxiv,  3, 
the  disciples.  Mark  xiii,  4,  and  Luke  xxi,  V.  The  form  of  the  ques- 
tion as  stated  by  Matthew  has  apparently  a  threefold  implication, 
touching,  respectively,  the  time  of  those  things,  the  sign  of  the 
parousia,  and  the  end  of  the  age  (see  above,  p.  438).  But  is  this 
sufficient  to  warrant  an  expectation  of  finding  in  our  Lord's  answer 
a  triple  division,  each  referring  to  a  different  event,  or  authorizing 
a  threefold  meaning  in  his  words?  Or  if  we  regard  the  question  as 
twofold,  is  it  of  a  nature  to  authorize  the  theory  of  a  double  sense, 
or  of  two  parallel  interpretations  enwrapped  in  one  and  the  same 
passage?  Much  more  reasonable,  we  submit,  is  the  supposition 
that,  when  the  disciples  made  their  inquiry,  they  had  no  clearly 
defined  outline  of  the  future  in  their  minds.  "  They  obviously  had 
not,"  says  Robinson,  "  at  the  time,  any  definite  and  distinct  notions 
of  that  terrible  overthrow  and  subversion  of  the  Jewish  people 
which  was  so  soon  to  take  place.  They  were  also  equally  ignorant 
in  respect  to  the  awful  events  which  are  to  be  the  accompaniments 
of  the  day  of  judgment  and  the  end  of  the  world.  We  cannot  suj)- 
pose  nor  admit  that  the  inquiry,  as  Matthew  puts  it,  suggested  to 

'  According  to  Nast  we  may  "  take  what  is  said  of  the  coming  of  Christ,  in  verses 
20-:56,  figuratively,  and  understand  by  it  a  judicial  visitation  of  nominal  Christendom 
by  Christ,  in  order  to  destroy  all  ungodly  institutions  and  principles  in  Church  and 
State,  of  which  (providential)  visitation  the  overthrow  of  the  Jewish  polity  was  but  a 
type,  and  which  itself  is,  in  turn,  the  full  type  of  the  final  and  total  overthrow  of  all 
powers  of  darkness  on  the  great  day  of  judgment." — Commentary  on  Matthew  and 
Mark,  p.  538.  Cincinnati,  1864.  This  writer's  entire  discussion  of  Matt,  xxiv,  ia 
■worthy  of  study  for  its  helpful  suggestions. 

*  Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  Matthew  (Anier.  ed.,  1864),  p.  418. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  441 

their  minds  the  same  ideas,  nor  events  of  the  same  character,  as  the 
same  language,  taken  by  itself,  would  now  suggest  to  us  under  the 
full  light  of  a  completed  revelation." '  Any  assumptions,  therefore, 
built  upon  the  threefold  form  of  the  disciples'  question,  will  be 
liable  to  mislead. 

It  is  also  important  that,  in  this  and  other  Scriptures  which  speak 
of  the  ovvrsXeia  rov  alibvog,  co7isimimatioii,  or  coniple-  ^^^  ^^^  ^^  tjjg 
tion  of  the  age,  we  disabuse  our  minds  of  the  mislead-  ^s^- 
ing  impression  begotten  by  the  common  translation,  "  end  of  the 
world,"  A  misinterpretation  of  this  phrase  is  the  root  of  many 
false  assumptions.  "  It  is  not  surprising  that  mere  English  readers 
of  the  New  Testament  should  suppose  that  this  phrase  really  means 
the  destruction  of  the  material  earth ;  but  such  an  error  ought  not 
to  receive  countenance  from  men  of  learning.  The  true  significa- 
tion of  aidv  is  not  world,  but  age.  Like  its  Latin  equivalent  aevum, 
it  refers  to  a  period  of  time.  The  '  end  of  the  age '  means  the  close 
of  the  epoch  or  age — that  is,  the  Jewish  age  or  dispensation  which 
was  drawing  nigh,  as  our  Lord  frequently  intimated.  All  those 
passages  which  speak  of  '  the  end,'  '  the  end  of  the  age,'  or  '  the 
ends  of  the  ages,'  refer  to  the  same  consummation,  and  always  as 
nigh  at  hand.  In  1  Cor.  x,  11,  St.  Paul  says,  '  The  ends  of  the  ages 
have  stretched  out  to  us;'  implying  that  he  regarded  himself  and 
his  readers  as  living  near  the  conclusion  of  an  seon,  or  age.  So,  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  we  find  the  remarkable  expression, 
'Now,  once,  close  upon  the  end  of  the  ages,  hath  he  appeared  to 
put  away  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself  (Heb.  ix,  26);  clearly 
showing  that  the  writer  regarded  the  incarnation  of  Christ  as  tak- 
ing place  near  the  end  of  the  aeon,  or  dispensational  period.  To 
suppose  that  he  meant  that  it  was  close  upon  the  end  of  the  world, 
or  the  destruction  of  the  material  globe,  would  be  to  make  him 
write  false  history  as  well  as  bad  grammar.  It  would  not  be  true 
in  fact  ;  for  the  world  has  already  lasted  longer  since  the  incarna- 
tion than  the  whole  duration  of  the  Mosaic  economy,  from  the 
exodus  to  the  destruction  of  the  temple.  It  is  futile,  therefore, 
to  say  that  the  'end  of  the  age'  may  mean  a  lengthened  period, 

'  Bibliotheca  Sacra  of  1843,  p.  533.  "The  disciples  assume,  as  a  matter  of  course," 
says  Meyer,  "that  immediately  after  the  destruction  in  question  the  Lord  will  appear, 
in  accordance  with  what  is  said  xxiii,  39,  for  the  purpose  of  setting  up  his  kingdom, 
and  that  with  this  the  current  (pre-Messianic)  era  of  the  world's  history  will  come  to 
an  end.  Consequently  they  wish  to  know,  in  the  second  place  (for  there  are  only  two 
questions,  not  three,  as  Grotius  and  Ebrard  suppose),  what  is  to  be  the  sign  which, 
after  the  destruction  of  the  temple,  is  to  precede  this  second  coming  and  the  end  of 
the  world,  that  by  it  they  may  be  able  to  recognize  the  approach  of  those  events." — 
Critical  Commentary  on  Matthew  xxiv,  3. 


443  PRINCIPLES   OF 

extending  from  the  incarnation  to  our  times,  and  even  far  beyond 
them.  That  would  be  an  aeon,  and  not  the  close  of  an  aeon.  The 
aeon  of  which  our  Lord  was  speaking  was  about  to  close  in  a  great 
catastrophe;  and  a  catastrophe  is  not  a  protracted  process,  but  a 
definitive  and  culminating  act." ' 

A  study  of  the  contents  and  scope  of'  Matt,  xxiv-xxv  will  be 
,    .    ,        erreatlv  aided  by  a  discriminating  analytical  outline  of 

Analysis  of  the    o  j  J  o  j  ^ 

Gospel  Apoca-  the  subject-matter.  Lange's  "  series  of  cycles  given 
'^^*^'  above  (pp.  439,  440)  is  suggestive,  and  designates  the 

more  noticeable  points  of  transition  in  the  course  of  the  prophecy. 
It  also  recognizes  its  apocalyptical  character.  But  the  notion  that 
*'  each  cycle  depicts  the  whole  futurity  "  is  without  warrant  in  the 
language  of  our  Lord.  The  following  is  a  condensed  summary  of 
the  principal  statements: 

1  There  will  be  false  Christs  and  a  great  apostacy,  verses  4,  5. 

2  There  will  be  wars,  rumours  of  wars,  famines,  and  earthquakes,  6,  7. 

3  You  will  suffer  persecution  and  martyrdom,  9. 

4  Great  offences,  betrayals,  and  feuds,  10. 

.■5  Many  false  prophets,  great  wickedness,  and  apostacj',  11,  12. 
C  The  Gospel  will  be  preached  in  all  the  world,  13,  14. 
7  Then  comes  the  end,  14. 

n. 

1  The  abomination  of  desolation,  15. 

2  The  flight  to  the  mountains,  16-30. 
?>  The  great  tribulation,  21,  22. 

4  Warnings  against  false  Christs  and  false  prophets,  23-26. 

5  The  parousia  like  the  lightning-flash,  37. 

6  Eagles  will  gather  on  the  carcass,  38. 

m. 

1  Darkening  and  shaking  of  sun,  moon,  and  stars  immediately  after  the 
great  tribulation,  39. 

3  The  sign  of  the  Son  of  man  in  the  clouds,  30. 

3  The  sending  forth  of  trumpet  angels  and  gathering  of  the  elect,  31. 

IV. 

1  The  similitude  of  the  fig-tree,  33,  33. 

2  All  these  things  within  this  generation,  34. 

3  Infallible  certainty  of  Jesus'  words,  35. 

'  The  Parousia.  A  Critical  IiKnury  into  the  New  Testament  Doctrine  of  our  Lord's 
Secoiul  Coming,  pp.  58,  59.  Lond.,  1878.  Meyer  says,  "The  tov  alCivo^  (the  age),  with 
the  article,  but  not  further  defined,  is  to  be  understood  as  referring  to  the  existing, 
the  then  current,  age  of  the  world,  i.  o.,  to  the  a'u.)v  ovtoc  (this  age),  which  is  brought 
to  a  close  {(jwriXeia)  witli  the  second  couuug,  inasmuch  as,  with  tiiis  latter  event,  the 
<il<ji'  fieXTiuv  (coming  age)  begins." — Commentary  on  Matthew  xxiv,  3. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  443 

4  The  day  and  hour  unknown,  verse  36. 

5  It  will  be  as  the  flood  in  Noah's  days,  37-39. 

6  Sudden  separations,  40-41. 

7  Admonition  to  watch,  42-51. 

The  twenty-lifth  chapter  readily  falls  into  three  parts,  (1)  the 
parable  of  the  ten  virgins  (verses  1-13),  (2)  the  parable  a  sevenfold 
of  the  talents  (14-30),  and  (3)  the  prophecy  of  eternal  structure, 
judgment  (31-46).  The  entire  discourse,  as  given  in  Matthew,  thus 
manifests  a  sevenfold  structure,  and  a  comparison  of  these  several 
parts  with  our  analysis  of  the  words  of  Joel  (see  above,  pp.  429- 
431)  will  disclose  many  noticeable  analogies. 

The  princijiles  of  grammatico-historical  interpretation  require 
our  close  attention  to  the  specific  time-limitations  of  Time-i  i  m  1 1  a- 
this  pi'ophecy.  The  entire  discourse  appears  to  have  tions  of  this 
grown  out  of  Jesus'  declaration:  "The  days  will  come  ^™^  *^'^^* 
in  Avhicli  there  shall  not  be  left  stone  upon  stone  here  which  shall 
not  be  thrown  down"  (Luke  xxi,  6;  comp.  Matt,  xxiv,  2;  Mark 
xiii,  2),  These  words,  especially,  occasioned  the  disciples'  ques- 
tion: "When  shall  these  things  be?"  The  whole  prophecy  pur- 
ports to  be  an  answer  to  that  question,  and  no  affirmation  in  it  is 
more  emphatic  than  the  words:  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you.  This  gener- 
ation shall  not  pass  away  till  all  these  things  be  accomplished" 
(Matt,  xxiv,  34;  Mark  xiii,  30;  Luke  xxi,  32).  On  what  valid  her- 
meneutical  principles,  then,  can  it  be  fairly  claimed  that  this  dis- 
course of  Jesus  comprehends  all  futurity?  Why  should  we  look 
for  the  revelations  of  far  distant  ages  and  millenniums  of  human 
history  in  a  prophecy  expressly  limited  to  the  generation '  in  which 
it  was  uttered? 

It  will  be  answered  that  the  statements  of  Matt,  xxiv,  14,  and 
Luke  xxi,  24,  and  the  style  of  language  used  in  Matt,  xxiv,  29-31, 

'  The  significations  which,  apparently  under  the  pressure  of  an  assumed  exeget- 
ical  necessity,  have  been  put  upon  the  words  n  yeveu  avrr},  this  generation,  may 
well  seem  absurd  to  the  unbiassed  critic.  To  put  upon  them  such  meanings  as  "  the 
human  race "  (Jerome),  or  "  the  Jewish  race  "  (Clarke,  Dorner,  Auberlen),  or  "  tlie 
race  of  Christian  behevers"  (Chrysostom,  Lange),  may  reasonably  be  condemned  m 
a  reading  whatever  suits  our  purpose  into  the  words  of  Scripture.  The  evident 
meaning  of  the  word  is  seen  in  such  texts  as  Matt,  i,  IV  ;  xvii,  17  ;  Acts  xiv,  16  ;  xv, 
21  (by-gone  generations,  generations  of  old),  and  nothing  in  New  Testament  exegesis 
is  capable  of  more  convincing  proof  than  that  yeved  is  the  Greek  equivalent  of  our 
word  generation ;  i.  e.,  the  mass  or  great  body  of  people  living  at  one  period — the 
period  of  average  lifetime.  Even  if  it  be  allowed  that  in  such  passages  as  Matt,  xi, 
16,  or  Luke  xvi,  8,  the  thought  of  a  particular  race  or  class  of  people  is  implied,  it  is 
beyond  doubt  that  in  those  same  passages  the  persons  referred  to  are  conceived  as 
contemporaries. 


444  PRINCIPLES   OP 

and  XXV,  31-46,  are  incompatible  with  the  time-limitations  desig- 
nated above.  A  careful  study  of  these  passages,  however,  in  the 
light  of  other  apocalyptic  Scriptures,  will  serve  to  show  that  they 
do  not  warrant  the  dogmatic  construction  which  many  interpreters 
have  put  upon  them.' 

1.  The  preaching  of  the  Gospel  of  the  kingdom  "  in  the  whole 
Import  of  Matt,  world  for  a  testimony  unto  all  the  nations"  (Matt, 
xxiv,  14.  xxiv,   14)   must  pi'ecede  the  end,  and  therefore,  it  is 

argued,  the  end  here  contemplated  must  be  in  the  far  future,  after 
all  nations  have  been  evangelized.  But  a  comparison  of  Luke  ii,  1, 
shows  that  all  this  same  world  {oUovfievT])  was  enrolled  by  a  decree 
of  Cffisar.  In  Col.  i,  6,  23,  the  Gospel  is  said  to  be  "  bearing  fruit 
in  all  the  world"  {ev  Travrl  tw  Kooiiut),  and  to  be  "preached  in  all 
creation  under  the  heaven."  The  Gospel,  therefore,  uttered  its 
testimony  to  all  the  nations  of  this  same  world  before  the  ruin  of 
the  temple  and  the  end  of  the  Jewish  aeon. 

1  Godet  (Commentary  on  Luke  xxi,  5-7)  afBrms  that  Matt,  xxiv  is  a  confused  mix- 
ture of  at  least  two  distinct  discourses  of  Jesus,  and,  lie  argues,  "  Jesus  could  not 
aflBrm  here  what  he  elsewhere  declares  that  he  did  not  know  "  (Mark  xiii,  32).  In 
this  statement  Godet,  like  many  others,  makes  no  distinction  between  a  dcuj  and  an 
hour,  and  the  period  of  a  generation.  Might  one  not  have  assurance  that  momentous 
events  would  take  place  within  a  generation  (i.  e.,  forty  or  fifty  years)  and  yet  not 
know  the  day  or  the  hour  ?  Moreover,  the  hypothesis  of  a  confused  report  of  Jesus* 
words  involves  a  loose  doctrine  of  ins])iration,  and  virtually  makes  it  the  work  of  the 
exegete  to  correct  the  mistakes  of  the  apostles.  Godet  proceeds :  "  While  he  an- 
nounces the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  as  an  event  to  be  witnessed  by  the  contem- 
porary generation,  he  speaks  of  the  parousia  as  one  which  is  possibly  yet  very  re- 
mote. Consider  the  expression  dai/s  will  come  (Luke  xvii,  22)  [but  why  assume  that 
these  days  must  be  very  remote?  The  full  import  of  the  words  would  be  satisfied  if 
the  days  came  within  ten  years],  and  the  parable  of  the  widow,  the  meaning  of 
which  is  that  God  will  seem  to  the  Church  an  unjust  judge,  who,  for  a  protracted 
time,  refuses  to  hear  her  [but  the  time  need  not  be  protracted  forty  years  to  seem 
very  long  to  those  who  cry  day  and  night — much  less  need  it  be  protracted  thousands 
of  years  !],  so  that  during  this  time  of  waiting  the  faith  of  many  shall  give  way 
(Luke  xviii,  1-8)  [but  was  it  not  possible  for  the  faith  of  many  to  give  way  during 
that  generation  as  well  as  in  any  subsequent  generation?].  The  Master  is  to 
return ;  but,  perhaps,  it  will  not  be  till  the  second  or  the  third  watch,  or  even  till 
the  morning,  that  he  will  come  (Mark  xiii,  ;55 ;  Luke  xii,  38)  [and,  forsooth,  no  sec- 
ond, third,  or  fouith  watch  of  any  day  or  night  within  forty  years  after  these  words 
were  spoken,  could  fulfil  this  saying!].  The  great  distance  at  which  the  capital 
lies  (Luke  xix,  12)  can  signify  nothing  else  than  the  considerable  space  of  time 
which  will  elapse  between  the  departure  of  Jesus  and  his  return."  But  one  genera- 
tion would  seem  to  be  time  enough  for  this ;  few  noblemen  would  expect  a  longer 
period  for  sucli  a  work  !  Far  less  time  would  probably  be  necessary  for  the  Son  of 
man  to  go  throiigh  the  clouds  to  the  Ancient  of  days  and  receive  from  him  a  kingdom 
(Dan.  vii,  \'\,  14),  and  return  to  supplant  Judaism  and  her  rule  by  a  more  f^piritual 
<l()minion. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  445 

2.  The  statement  in  Luke  xxi,  24,  that  "  Jerusalem  shall  be  trod- 
den down  by  Gentiles  until  the  times  of  the  Gentiles  importofLuke 
be  fultilled,"  is  supposed  to  involve  events  which  did  xxi,  24. 

not  take  place  in  that  generation.  The  "times  of  the  Gentiles" 
(Kaipoi  kdvo)v)  are  assumed  to  be  the  times  and  opportunities  of 
grace  afforded  to  the  Gentiles  under  the  Gospel.  But  to  under- 
stand the  words  in  this  sense  would  be,  as  Van  Oosterzee  observes, 
to  interpolate  a  thought  entirely  foreign  to  the  context.'  "The 
times  of  the  Gentiles,"  says  Bengel,  "  are  the  times  allotted  to  the 
Gentiles  to  tread  down  the  city;"  but  there  is  nothing  in  the  pas- 
saare  or  context  to  authorize  his  further  remark  that  "  these  times 
shall  be  ended  when  the  Gentiles'  conversion  shall  be  fully  con- 
summated," ^  and  that  the  treading  down  by  Romans,  Persians,  Sara- 
cens, Franks,  and  Turks  is  to  be  understood.  These  Kuipot  are 
manifestly  times  of  judgment  upon  Jerusalem,  not  times  of  salva- 
tion to  the  Gentiles.  The  most  natural  and  obvious  parallel  is  Rev. 
xi,  2,  where  the  outer  court  of  the  temple  is  said  to  be  "  given  to 
the  Gentiles,"  by  whom  the  holy  city  shall  be  trodden  down  forty- 
two  months,  a  period  equivalent  to  the  "  time  and  times  and  half  a 
time"  of  Rev.  xii,  14,  and  of  Dan.  vii,  25;  xii,  7.  This  is  a  sym- 
bolical period  of  judgment  (see  above,  p.  384),  but  does  not  de- 
note ages  and  generations.  It  is  three  and  a  half — a  divided 
seven,  a  short  but  signal  period  of  woe.  The  "  times  of  the  Gen- 
tiles," therefore,  are  the  three  and  a  half  times  (approximating 
three  and  a  half  years)  during  which  the  Gentile  armies  besieged 
and  trampled  down  Jerusalem.' 

3.  The  language  of  Matt,  xxiv,  29-31,  has  probably  been  the 
principal  reason  for  believing  that  this  prophecy  must  importofMatt. 
refer  to  other  events  than  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ^^^''  ^^^^• 
and  the  end  of  the  Jewish  dispensation.  Pressing  the  literal  sense 
of  the  words,  many  interpreters  have  asked:  When  was  the  sun 
thus  darkened  and  the  heavens  shaken  ?  Who  ever  saw  the  Son 
of  man  thus  coming  in  the  clouds,  or  heard  the  loud-sounding 
trumpet  of  his  angels  ?     Or  when  did  he  thus  gather  his  elect  from 

'  Commentary  on  Luke  (Lange's  Biblework),  in  loco. 

'  Gnomon  of  the  New  Testament  on  Luke  xxi,  24.  These  "  times  of  the  Gentiles  " 
must  not  be  confounded  with  the  "fulness  of  the  Gentiles  "  in  Rom.  xi,  25. 

^  Meyer  explains  the  passage  "  till  the  times  of  the  Gentiles  be  fulfilled,"  as  mean- 
ing "  till  the  time  that  the  periods  which  are  appointed  to  the  Gentiles  for  the  com- 
pletion of  divine  judgments  (not  the  period  of  grace  for  the  Gentiles,  as  Ebrard  foists 
into  the  passage)  shall  have  run  out.  Comp.  Rev.  xi,  2.  Such  times  of  the  Gentiles 
are  ended  in  the  case  in  question  by  the  parousia  (verses  25-27)  which  is  to  occur 
during  the  lifetime  of  the  hearers  (ver.  28) ;  hence  those  Kaipoi  are  in  no  way  to  be 
regarded  as  of  longer  duration." — Critical  Commentary,  in  loco. 


446  PRINCIPLES    OF 

one  end  of  heaven  to  the  other  ?     If  all  this  is  figurative,  where 
shall  we  find  a  literal  description  of  the  final  day? 

To  all  which  it  may  be  answered:  There  is  no  valid  reason  for 
Anaiojfous  presuming  in  advance  that  we  should  anywhere  find  a 
prophecies.  literal  description  of  the  last  judgment.  On  the  con- 
trary there  is  the  analogy  of  prophecy,  and  especially  of  apocalyp- 
tic prophecy,  to  show  that  great  catastrophes  of  divine  judgment 
are  foretold  mainly  in  figure  and  by  symbol.  The  language  of 
Matt,  xxiv,  29,  is  manifestly  appropriated  from  such  Scriptures  as 
Joel  ii,  10,  31;  Ezek.  xxxii,  7,  and  Isa.  xiii,  10.'  Our  Lord  made 
use  of  the  prophetical  style  familiar  to  every  well-read  Jew,''  but 
the  extreme  literalism  maintained  by  modern  Chiliasts  would  ut- 
terly destroy  any  rational  exposition  of  such  a  passage  as  Isa. 
xxxiv,  4,  5: 

All  the  hosts  of  the  heavens  sliall  be  melted, 

And  the  heavens  shall  be  rolled  together  as  the  scroll, 

And  all  their  host  shall  fall, 

As  falls'  a  leaf  from  the  vine, 

And  as  a  fallen  fig  from  the  fig-tree. 

For  my  sword  shall  be  sated  in  the  heavens; 

Behold  upon  Edom  it  shall  come  down, 

And  upon  the  people  of  my  curse,  for  judgment. 

When  the  leading  Old  Testament  prophet  makes  use  of  such  lan- 
guage in  foretelling  the  desolation  of  Edom,  with  what  reason  or 
propriety  can  we  insist  on  the  literal  import  of  such  passages  as 
Matt,  xxiv,  29,  and  2  Peter  iii,  10. 

The  language  of  Matt,  xxiv,  30,  concerning  "  the  Son  of  man  corn- 
Language  of  ing  in  the  clouds  of  the  heaven  with  power  and  much 
Matt,  xxiv,  30.  glory,"  is  taken  from  Daniel's  night  vision  (Dan.  vii, 
13)  in  which  he  saw  the  Son  of  man  coming  to  the  Ancient  of  days 
and  receiving  from  him  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom.  That 
vision  was  a  part  of  the  composite  symbol  of  world-empire,  and 
signified  that  "  the  kingdom,  and  dominion,  and  the  greatness  of 
the  kingdom  under  the  whole  heaven,  shall  be  given  to  the  people 
of  the  saints  of  the  Most  High,  whose  kingdom  is  an  everlasting 

'  See  the  whole  passage,  Isa.  xiii,  2-13,  as  translated  on  page  414  above,  and  used 
to  portray  a  great  national  catastrophe,  the  fall  of  Babylon. 

''"There  have  been  many  interpreters,"  says  Planck,  "who  knew  nothing  at  all 
of  the  local  and  temporary  moaning  of  certain  phrases  and  expressions  in  the  Bible ; 
to  wlioiii,  in  fact,  it  never  once  occurred  that  the  early  Jews  could  have  attached 
other  ideas  to  certain  forms  of  speech  tlian  those  which  tlic  literal  sense  of  the  tei-ins 
expressed." — Introduction  to  Sacred  Philology  and  Interpretation,  p.  14(3.  Ediub. 
(Bil).  Cab.),  18,34. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  447 

kingdom,  and  all  dominions  shall  serve  and  obey  him  "  (Dan,  vii, 
27).  The  kingdom  received  from  the  Ancient  of  days  is  no  other 
than  the  kingdom  symbolized  by  the  stone  cut  out  of  the  mountain^ 
in  chap,  ii,  34,  35,  which  "became  a  great  mountain  and  filled  all 
the  land,"  This  is  the  kingdom  of  Messiah,  which  the  Chiliasts  be- 
lieve to  be  yet  future,  but  which  is  more  generally  believed  to  be 
the  Gospel  dispensation,  a  kingdom  not  of  this  world,  and  not  inau- 
gurated with  phenomenal  splendour  visible  to  mortal  eyes.  Like 
the  stone  cut  out  of  the  mountain,  and  the  mustard-seed,  it  is  small 
and  comparatively  unimportant  at  its  beginning,  but  it  grows  so  as 
to  fill  the  earth.  This  kingdom,  according  to  Jesus'  oA^n  testimony 
(Luke  xvii,  20),  "comes  not  with  observation;"  that  is,  says  Meyer, 
"the  coming  of  the  Messiah's  kingdom  is  not  so  conditioned  that 
this  coming  could  be  observed  as  a  visible  development,  or  that  it 
could  be  said,  in  consequence  of  such  observation,  that  here  or  there 
is  the  kingdom."  *  It  may  safely  be  affirmed,  therefore,  that  this 
language  concerning  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  in  the  clouds 
means  no  more  on  the  lips  of  Jesus  than  in  the  writings  of  Daniel. 
It  denotes  in  both  places  a  sublime  and  glorious  reality,  the  grand- 
est event  in  human  history,  but  not  a  visible  display  in  the  heavens 
of  such  a  nature  as  to  be  a  matter  of  scenic  observation.  The  Son 
of  man  came  in  heavenly  power  to  supplant  Judaism  by  a  better 
covenant,  and  to  make  the  kingdoms  of  the  world  his  own,  and  that 
parousia  dates  from  the  fall  of  Judaism  and  its  temple.  The 
mourning  of  "all  the  tribes  of  the  land"  (not  all  the  nations  of  the 
globe)  was  coincident  with  the  desolation  of  Zion,  and  our  Lord 
appropriately  foretold  it  in  language  taken  from  Zech,  xii,  11,  12. 

The  sending  forth  of  the  angels,  and  the  gathering  of  the  elect, 
described  in  Matt,  xxiv,  31,  whatever  its  exact  mean-  import  of  Matt. 
ing,  does  not  necessarily  depict  a  scenic  procedure  vis-  ^"^i^-  31, 
ible  to  human  eyes."  If  understood  literally,  it  may,  nevertheless, 
be  only  a  verbal  revelation  of  what  took  place  in  such  a  supernat- 
ural manner  as  that  no  man  might  behold  it  and  remain  alive.  It 
is  said  in  verses  40  and  41  that  at  the  parousia  "two  men  shall  be 

'  Critical  Commentary  on  Luke,  in  loco. 

'  This  verse  has  been  understood,  figuratively,  of  the  sending  forth  of  the  messen- 
gers of  the  Gospel  to  gather  unto  Christ  an  elect  Church  in  place  of  the  outcast  Israel. 
In  that  sense  it  was  a  procedure  which  followed  the  parousia  and  still  continues.  So 
Lightfoot :  "  When  Jerusalem  shall  be  reduced  to  ashes,  and  this  impious  race  shall 
have  been  cut  off  and  rejected,  then  the  Son  of  man  will  send  forth  his  ministers  with 
the  Gospel  trumpet,  and  they  shall  gather  his  elect  among  the  Gentiles  from  the  four 
corners  of  heaven ;  so  that  God  will  not  be  left  without  a  Church,  although  his  an- 
cient people  be  rejected  and  disowned." — Iloras  Hebraicae  on  Matt,  xxiv,  31.  This 
explanation,  however,  will  be  accepted  by  very  few. 


448  PRINCIPLES   OP 

in  the  field;  one  is  taken  and  one  is  left;  two  women  shall  be  grind- 
ing at  the  mill;  one  is  taken  and  one  is  left."  In  snch  a  miraculous 
rapture  of  living  saints  (comp.  1  Thess.  iv,  16,  17;  1  Cor.  xv,  51, 
52)  the  person  left  may  not  have  been  permitted  to  see  the  one 
taken.  It  was  a  special  favour  to  Elisha  that  he  was  enabled  to 
behold  Elijah  when  the  latter  was  caught  up  into  heaven  (2  Kings 
ii,  9-12).  A  similar  favour  enabled  Elisha's  servant  to  see  the 
mountain  full  of  horses  and  chariots  of  fire  (2  Kings  vi,  17).  Those 
heavenly  forces  were  truly  present  to  execute  Jehovah's  judgment, 
though  invisible  to  the  eyes  of  men.  At  the  resurrection  of  Jesus 
*'many  bodies  of  the  saints  who  had  fallen  asleep  were  raised,  and 
coming  forth  out  of  the  tombs,  they  entered  into  the  holy  city,  and 
appeared  unto  many"  (Matt,  xxvii,  52,  53).  But  that  wonderful 
€vent  was  not  made  a  phenomenon  visible  to  the  world.  So,  there 
ajipears  no  sufficient  reason  for  denying  that  at  the  judgment  of  Je- 
rusalem many  other  bodies  of  the  saints  which  slept  arose,  and 
many  living  saints  were  miraculously  translated.  Hence  we  may 
not  dogmatically  conclude  that  any  of  the  statements  of  Matt, 
xxiv,  29-31  are  inconsistent  with  the  time-limits  which  Jesus  so 
positively  set  to  this  eschatological  prophecy. 

Whatever  the  events  described  in  these  verses,  they  are  said  to 
Import  of  follow  "immediately  after  the  tribulation  of  those 
evdt:ug,immQ-  days"  (ver.  29).  That  tribulation  is  conceded  to  be 
diateiy.  ^j^^  unparalleled  sufferings  referred  to  in  verses  21  and 

22  which  were  occasioned  by  the  siege  of  Jerusalem.  Josephus 
observes  that,  in  his  judgment,  the  misfortunes  of  all  men  from  the 
beginning  of  time  were  comparatively  of  less  magnitude  than  those 
of  the  Jews  in  this  fearful  war.'  It  is  notable  that  srreat  efforts  have 
been  made  by  a  number  of  expositors  to  escape  the  force  and  bearing 
of  the  word  evdeo)g,  immediately.  Some  try  to  explain  it  as  equiva- 
lent with  suddenly,  but  this  scarcely  helps  the  case,  for  thus,  says 
Desprez,  "  Matthew  is  taken  to  mean,  '  When  the  tribulation  of  the 
•days  in  which  Jerusalem  shall  be  destroyed  shall  have  passed  away, 
then,  after  some  indefinite  interval,  which  may  amount  to  myriads 
of  years,  all  of  a  sudden  the  groat  consummation  will  fall  like  a 
thunderbolt  upon  mankind.'  To  this  the  reply  is — (1)  that  the  in- 
terpretation is  ungrammatical,  and  that  if  this  be  the  meaning  of  the 
words  translated  "  immediately  "  (evdeojg  de),  any  words  may  be  made 
to  mean  any  thing;  (2)  that  the  parallel  passage  in  INIark  (xiii,  24) 
states  distinctly  that  the  signs  of  the  final  consummation  shall  be 
seen  in  the  very  days  which  follow  the  former  tribulation;  and 
(3)  that   Jesus   himself   is   described   as   saying   that  every  thing 

1  Wars  of  the  Jews,  Preface,  4. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  449 

should  be  accomplished  within  the  limits  of  the  existing  genera- 
tion." ' 

We  are  driven,  then,  by  every  sound  principle  of  hermeneutics, 
to  conclude  that  Matt,  xxiv,  29-31,  must  be  included  within  the 
time-limits  of  the  discourse  of  which  it  forms  an  essential  part,  and 
cannot  be  legitimately  applied  to  events  far  separate  from  the  final 
•catastrophe  of  the  Jewish  state." 

4.  The  description  of  the  judgment  of  all  nations  in  Malt,  xxv, 
31-46  is  expressly  associated  with  the  coming  of  the  The  judgment 
Son  of   man    in   his  glory.     It  is  connected  with   the  °[  ,^"  nations, 

~       •'  Matt,  xxv,  tsl- 

preceding  discourse  by  the  particle  de,  and  is,  there-  46. 
fore,  not  to  be  regarded  as  a  distinct  and  independent  prophecy. 
Its  tropical  character,  however,  is  apparent  from  its  use  of  the  terms 
sheep  and  goats,  and  the  scenic  portraitui'e  of  the  separation  and 
the  judgment;  but  its  doctrine  manifestly  involves  the  eternal  des- 
tinies of  the  righteous  and  the  wicked. 

The  apparent  difficulty  of  connecting  this  picture  of  judgment 
and  eternal  destiny  with  the  ruin  of  Jerusalem  will  be   ^   .  ^     ,  , 

J  _  ,  Scriptural  doc- 

obviated  by  a  more  careful  attention  to  the  scriptural  trine  of  Judg- 
doctrine  of  divine  judgment.  "VVe  miss  the  full  scrip-  °^^° ' 
tural  idea  of  judgment  (t^SpS  t^St^p,  Kgivcj,  Kplotg)  when  we  conceive 
of  it  as  confined  to  one  last  day,  one  formal  rehearsal  of  every  act 
of  human  history  before  a  tribunal  in  the  heavens,  at  which  the  in- 
dividuals of  all  nations  and  ages  shall  be  simultaneously  assembled. 
So  far  as  this  conception  involves  the  fundamental  idea  that  every 
individual  shall  be  brought  into  judgment  before  God,  and  that  the 

'  Daniel  and  John,  p.  241.  London,  1878.  Whedon  explains  the  immediately 
by  borrowing  Luke  xxi,  24  as  a  context.  Assuming  that  the  "  times  of  the  Gen- 
tiles "  are  "  the  period  of  the  more  exclusive  Gentile  churchdom,"  he  supposes 
that,  subsequent  to  that  period,  the  millennial  ages  will  terminate  in  the  "  tribulation 
of  those  days,"  immediately  after  which  the  final  judgment  will  take  place.  All  these 
suppositions  are  based  upon  the  assumption  "  that  we  may  be  allowed  to  supply  from 
one  evangelist  the  omissions  by  another  of  important  passages,  and  allow  the  parts  so 
supplied  to  modify  the  meaning  of  the  context  which  they  supplement." — Commentary 
on  Matthew,  p.  277.  Facts  or  statements  in  one  gospel  may,  indeed,  help  us  to  un- 
derstand facts  and  statements  in  another,  but  to  appropriate  a  context  from  another 
book  is  scarcely  allowable  to  an  interpreter. 

^  The  statement  that  "  that  day  and  hour  "  is  unknown  to  any  but  the  Father  (Matt. 
xxiv,  36;  Mark  xiii,  32;  comp.  Acts  i,  7 ;  1  Thess.  v,  1,  2 ;  2  Peter  iii,  10)  is  not  in 
the  least  inconsistent  with  the  assurance  that  all  will  take  place  within  a  generation. 
To  pretend  otherwise  would  be  to  accuse  Jesus  of  solemn  trifling,  for  it  would  involve 
the  absurd  proposition :  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  This  generation  shall  not  pass  away 
till  all  these  things  be  accomplished ;  nevertheless,  that  day  and  hour  may  be  two 
thousand  years  in  the  future.  See  the  strictures  on  Godet's  comment,  footnote  to 
page  444. 
29 


450  PRINCIPLES   OF 

issue  of  suc'li  judgment  will  be  according  to  character  and  deeds^ 
it  is  warranted  not  only  by  numerous  particular  texts,  but  also 
by  the  whole  drift  of  Scripture  teaching  concerning  the  character 
of  God  and  his  governmental  relation  to  men.  The  mediatorial 
reign  of  Christ  may  appropriately  culminate  in  such  a  final  Kpioig, 
and  this  is  the  common  belief  of  the  Church.  But  nothing  could 
be  more  unscriptural  than  the  notion  that  the  judgment  of  nations 
and  of  individuals  is  limited  to  one  last  day.  It  is  a  continual  proc- 
ess, running  through  the  Messianic  era,  and  a  necessary  part  of  the 
administration  of  the  King  of  kings.  Nations  are  continually  un- 
dero-oing  signal  judgment,'  and  the  eternal  destinies  of  individuals 
are  being  determined  every  day.  And  this  is  essentially  the  order 
of  Christ's  rei^n.  He  is  enthroned  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  and 
must  reign  till  he  has  overthrown  all  rival  authority  and  power, 
and  has  put  all  his  enemies  under  his  feet.  One  of  the  notable 
features  of  the  Messiah's  reign  is  that  the  Father  commits  all  jiulg- 
ment  unto  the  Son  (John  v,  22);  he  "gave  him  authority  to  execute 
judgment,  because  he  is  the  Son  of  man"  (ver.  27).  That  is,  he  is 
the  Son  of  man  described  in  the  visions  of  Daniel  Avho  came  with 
the  clouds  of  heaven  and  received  of  the  Ancient  of  days  a  kingdom 
and  dominion  over  all  nations  (Dan.  vii,  9-14).  His  regal  office  and 
authority  constitute  him  judge  and  ruler  of  all,  and  Matt,  xxv, 
31-46  is  a  vivid  picture  not  merely  of  what  will  take  place  at  the 
end  of  time,  but  of  what  the  Christ  continually  does  from  the  time 
of  his  session  upon  the  throne  of  his  glory  until  he  shall  haA'e 
delivered  up  the  kingdom  to  the  Father  (1  Cor.  xv,  24). 

The  judgment  scene  of  Matt,  xxv,  31-46,  is,  therefore,  to  be  un- 
derstood of  a  divine  procedure  which  has  its  formal  inauguration 
at  the  beginning  of  Messiah's  reign,  and  goes  on  with  ihe  progress 
of  the  Messianic  age.  Accordingly  it  contains  nothing  inconsistent 
with  the  time-limitation  of  the  prophecy  of  which  it  forms  a  part. 

According  to  all  these  accounts  the  parousia  of  the  Son  of  man 
was  to  be  coincident  with  the  appalling  catastroi^he  of 

The     Parousia  '  ^  nr        • 

coincidont  Jerusalem  and  the  Jewish  polity.     As  the  Mosaic  polity 

the  Jelv'isif  poi-  ^^^^  instituted  at  Sinai  when  Jehovah  came  down  upon 

ityaudtheend  the  mountain  amid  fire  and  smoke  and  earthquake  :ui<l 

Id  age.  ^^^^  sound  of  ^  trumpet  (Exod.  xix,  16-20),  so  that  polity 

'  Hence  the  profounrl  and  far-reaching  significance  of  that  prophetic  utterance  of 
Joel  (see  above,  p.  4:51)  which  stands  as  a  generic  prophecy  of  divine  judgment,  and 
has  a  thousandfold  application  in  the  history  of  men  and  nations : 

Multitudes,  multitudes  in  the  valley  of  judgment  I 
For  near  Is  the  day  of  Jeliovah, 
In  tlie  valley  of  judgment. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  451 

was  made  to  cease,  and  its  aeon  came  to  an  end  when  the  Son  of 
man,  Jehovah-Christ,  came  in  terrible  judgment  to  execute  ven- 
geance upon  his  enemies.'    Then  was  fulfilled  the  prophecy  of  Joel: 

I  will  give  wonders  in  the  heavens  and  in  the  laud 

Blood,  and  fire,  and  columns  of  smoke ; 

The  sun  shall  be  turned  to  darkness, 

And  the  moon  to  blood, 

Before  the  coining  of  the  day  of  Jehovah, 

The  great  and  the  terrible.    (Joel  ii,  30,  31.) 

There  is  not  wantinar  evidence  that  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
was  accompanied  by  many  awe-inspiring  portents,  signs,  and  super- 
natural agencies  co-operating  with  the  armies  of  men.  Josephus 
describes  a  marvellous  prodigy  that  appeared  in  the  heavens  on  this 
wise  :  "  I  suppose  the  account  of  it  would  seem  to  be  a  fable  were  it 
not  related  by  those  that  saw  it,  and  were  not  the  events  that  fol- 
lowed it  of  so  considerable  a  nature  as  to  deserve  such  signals ;  for, 
before  sun-setting,  chariots  and  troops  of  soldiers  in  their  visible  sigus 
armotir  were  seen  running  about  among  the  clouds  and  of  judgment. 
surrounding  of  cities.""  He  also  relates  how  a  star  resembling  a 
sword  hung  over  the  city,  and  a  comet  appeared,  and  a  great  light 
one  niglit  shone  about  the  altar  and  the  temple  for  half  an  hour. 
There  were  also  quakings  and  strange  noises.  Such  portents  amply 
fulfilled  the  "  terrors  and  great  signs  from  heaven  "  of  which  Luke 
speaks  (xxi,  11).  But  who  can  say  what  other  sights  appeared  at 
the  fiiuil  moment  of  the  catastrophe?  The  parousia  was  like  the 
lightning  flash  (Matt,  xxiv,  27),  not  abiding  for  days  like  the  Glory  on 
Sinai  (Exod.  xxiv,  16).  "  Tlie  sight  of  the  glory  of  Jehovah  was  like 
devouring  fire  on  the  top  of  the  mountain  to  the  eyes  of  the  sons  of 
Israel"  (Exod.  xxiv,  17) ;  and  that  glory  was  a  real  presence,  a  veri- 
table parousia,  for  "Jehovah  came  down  upon  Mount  Sinai"  (Exod. 
xix,  20).  And  yet  in  that  Sinaitic  parousia  the  Israelites  saw  no 
form  or  shape  (nj^Dn)  of  the  divine  Person  (Deut.  iv,  15).  Whether 
those  who  saw  the  sign  of  the  Son  of  man  which  appeared  in  heaven 

'  Chiliastic  writers,  in  claiming  that  the  word  wapovaia,  coming^  or  presence,  always 
means  a  personal  presence,  appear  to  assume  that  there  can  be  no  personal  coming  or 
presence  of  the  Lord  unless  it  be  literally  visible  to  human  eyes.  This  would  exclude 
the  personal  presence  of  God  and  of  angels  from  the  divine  government  of  the  world. 
Will  it  be  pretended  tliat  there  was  no  personal  coming  or  presence  of  Jehovah  at  the 
destruction  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah?  Comp.  Gen.  xviii,  21;  xix,  24,  25.  But  liie 
Scriptures  give  no  intimation  of  any  visible  appearance  of  the  holy  One  to  the  inhab- 
itants of  the  doomed  cities.  And  so  again  and  again  has  God  come  in  terrible  jud-r- 
ment  upon  wicked  men  and  nations  without  any  visible  display  of  his  person — a  sight 
which  no  man  may  behold  and  live  (Exod.  xxxiii,  20). 

'^  Wars,  vi,  5,  3.     Comp.  Tacitus,  Annals,  xiv,  12,  22;  xv,  22,  47;  xvi,  13. 


453  PRINCIPLES   OF 

immediately  after  the  tribulation  of  those  days  (Matt,  xxiv,  29, 
30)  saw  the  person  and  form  of  the  Son  of  man  himself,  or  only 
some  symbol  of  his  presence,  must  remain  a  mystery.'  In  either 
case  his  coming  at  that  time  was  a  real,  particular,  personal,  and 
momentous  coming,  to  consummate  an  old  dispensation  and  inaugu- 
rate a  new  one.  It  was  truly  a  shaking  of  earth  and  heaven  for  the 
])urpose  of  removing  that  which  Avas  ready  to  pass  away,  and  of 
instituting  "a  kingdom  which  cannot  be  shaken"  (Ileb.  xii,  26-28). 

This  view  of  the  parousia  of  Christ  harmonizes  with  all  his  utter- 
This  view  of  ances  of  its  nearness.  He  had  before  this  said:  "There 
acoordswithTte  ^^^  some  of  them  standing  here  who  shall  not  taste  of 
nearness  as  death  until  they  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in  his  king- 
fort'if^^in^'^New  dom "  (Matt,  xvi,  28).  Compare  the  no  less  decisive 
Testament.  statements  in  Mark  ix,  1,  and  Luke  ix,  27.  These  dec- 
larations, probably  often  repeated,  made  a  deep  impression  on  the 
disciples,  and  led  them  to  look  in  their  own  day  for  "the  blessed 
hope  and  appearing  of  the  glory  of  the  great  God  and  of  our  Sa- 
viour Jesus  Christ"  (Titus  ii,  13).  We  should  bear  in  mind  that 
all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  except  the  Gospel  of  John, 
were  written  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  they  all  wit- 
ness the  current  vivid  expectation  of  a  speedy  coming  of  the  Lord. 

On  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecies  of  Matt,  xxiv  the  author  of 
"The  Parousia"  makes  the  following  observations:  "It  is  possible  to 
believe  in  the  fulfilment  of  predictions  which  take  efifect  in  the  vis- 
ible order  of  things,  because  we  have  historical  evidence  of  that  ful- 
filment; but  how  can  we  be  expected  to  believe  in  fulfilments  which 
are  said  to  have  taken  place  in  the  region  of  the  spiritual  and  in- 
visible when  we  have  no  witnesses  to  depose  to  the  facts?  We  can 
implicitly  believe  in  the  accomplishment  of  all  that  was  predicted 
respecting  the  horrors  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  the  burning  of  the 
temple,  and  the  demolition  of  the  city,  because  we  have  the  testi- 
mony of  Josephus  to  the  facts;  but  how  can  we  believe  in  a  coming 
of  the  Son  of  man,  in  a  resurrection  of  the  dead,  in  an  act  of  judg- 
ment, when  we  have  nothing  but  the  word  of  prophecy  to  rely  upon, 
and  no  Josephus  to  vouch  for  the  historical  accuracy  of  the  facts  ? 

' "  Tlie  sign  of  ilic  Son  of  man  "  may  mean  the  ruin  of  the  Jewish  temple,  consiil- 
orcd  as  a  sij^n  or  token  that  the  old  aeon  tlierehy  is  ended,  and  the  new  Messianic  a-on 
is  begun.  "  The  sign  of  the  prophet  Jonah  "  (Matt,  xii,  39 ;  xvi,  4)  was  no  miracu- 
lous phenomenon  in  the  heavens.  The  analogy  between  Christ  and  Jonah  for  three 
<lays  and  three  nights  (Matt,  xii,  40)  may  be  compared  with  John  ii,  19-21  as  suggest- 
ing that  "the  temple  of  his  body,"  which  was  raised  up  in  three  days,  was  a  prophetic 
sign  that  upon  the  ruin  of  Judaism  and  its  temple  there  would  rise  that  nobler  "  spir. 
itual  house"  (1  Teter  ii,  5),  "which  is  his  body,  the  fulness  of  him  who  filleth  all  in 
all  "  (Eph.  i,  23). 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  453 

"To  this  it  can  only  be  said  in  reply  that  the  demand  for  human 
testimony  to  events  in  the  region  of  the  unseen  is  not  altogether 
reasonable.  If  we  receive  them  at  all  it  must  be  on  the  word  of 
Him  who  declared  that  all  these  things  would  assuredly  take  place 
before  that  generation  passed  away.  But,  after  all,  is  the  demand 
upon  our  faith  in  this  matter  so  A^ery  excessive  ?  A  large  portion 
of  these  predictions  we  know  to  have  been  literally  and  punctually 
fulfilled;  we  recognise  in  that  accomplishment  a  remarkable  proof 
of  the  truth  of  the  word  of  God  and  the  superhuman  prescience 
that  foresaw  and  foi-etold  the  future.  Could  any  thing  have  been 
less  probable  at  the  time  when  our  Lord  delivered  his  prophetic  dis- 
course than  the  total  destruction  of  the  temple,  the  razing  of  the 
city,  and  the  ruin  of  the  nation  in  the  lifetime  of  the  existing  gen- 
eration ?  What  can  be  more  minute  and  particular  than  the  signs 
of  the  end  enumerated  by  our  Lord  ?  What  can  be  more  precise 
and  literal  than  the  fulfilment  of  them  ? 

"  But  the  part  which  confessedly  has  been  fulfilled,  and  which  is 
vouched  for  by  uninspired  history,  is  inseparably  bound  up  with 
another  portion  which  is  not  so  vouched  for.  Nothing  but  a  vio- 
lent disruption  can  detach  the  one  part  of  this  prophecy  from  the 
other.  It  is  one  from  beginning  to  end — a  complete  whole.  The 
finest  instrument  cannot  draw  a  line  separating  one  portion  which 
relates  to  that  generation  from  another  portion  which  relates  to  a 
different  and  distant  period.  Every  part  of  it  rests  on  the  same 
foundation,  and  the  whole  is  so  linked  and  concatenated  that  all 
must  stand  or  fall  together.  We  are  justified,  therefore,  in  holding 
that  the  exact  accomplishment  of  so  much  of  the  prophecy  as  comes 
within  the  cognizance  of  the  senses,  and  is  capable  of  being  vouched 
for  by  human  testimony,  is  a  presumption  and  guarantee  in  favour 
of  the  exact  fulfilment  of  that  portion  which  lies  within  the  region 
of  the  invisible  and  spiritual,  and  which  cannot,  in  the  nature  of 
things,  be  attested  by  human  evidence.  This  is  not  credulity,  but 
reasonable  faith,  such  as  men  fearlessly  exercise  in  all  their  worldly 
transactions. 

"  We  conclude,  therefore,  that  all  the  parts  of  our  Lord's  predic- 
tion refer  to  the  same  pei-iod  and  the  same  event;  that  the  whole 
prophecy  is  one  and  indivisible,  resting  upon  the  same  foundation 
of  divine  authority.  Further,  that  all  that  was  cognizable  by  the 
human  senses  is  proved  to  have  been  fulfilled,  and,  therefore,  we 
^re  not  only  warranted,  but  bound  to  assume  the  fulfilment  of  the 
remainder  as  not  only  credible,  but  certain."  ' 

1  The  Parousia,  pp.  54V,  548. 


454  PIUNCTPLES  OF 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

THE     PAULINE    ESCHATOLOGY. 

I.v  exhibiting  the  chief  points  of  the  Pauline  doctrine  of  the  pa- 
rousia  and  the  resurrection  and  taking  away  of  saints,  we  pass  over 
numerous  incidental  allusions,  scattered  here  and  there  throughout 
the  several  epistles,  and  take  first  the  classic  passage  in  1  Thess. 
iv,  13-17.     The  following  is  a  literal  and  accurate  translation: 

(13)  But  we  would  not  have  you  to  be  ignorant,  brethren,  conceining- 
those  who  are  falling  asleep;  that  ye  sorrow  not,  even  as  the  rest,  who  have 
no  hope.  (14)  For  if  we  believe  that  Jesus  died  and  rose  again,  so  also 
will  God  through  Jesus  bring  with  him  those  who  fell  asleep.  (15)  For 
this  we  say  to  you  in  a  word  of  the  Lord,  that  we,  the  living  who  remain 
unto  the  coming  of  the  Lord,  shall  not  precede  those  who  fell  asleep; 
(16)  because  the  Lord  himself  sliall  descend  from  heaven  witli  a  shout, 
with  voice  of  archangel  and  with  trump  of  God,  and  the  dead  in  Christ 
sliall  rise  first;  (17)  then  we,  the  living  who  remain,  shall  together  with 
them  be  caught  away  in  clouds  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air;  and  so  shall 
we  ever  be  with  the  Lord. 

It  seems  hardly  possible  to  mistake  the  import  of  these  words. 
"  Most  modern  expositors,"  says  Ellicott,  "  seem  rightly  to  coincide 
TheThessaion-  i"  ^^^^  Opinion  that  in  the  infant  church  of  Thessalonica 
Ian  anxiety.  there  had  prevailed,  apparently  from  the  very  first,  a 
feverish  anxiety  about  the  state  of  those  Avho  had  departed,  and 
about  the  time  and  circumstances  of  the  Lord's  coming.  They 
seem  especially  to  have  feared  that  those  of  their  brethren  who  had 
fallen  on  sleep  before  the  expected  advent  of  the  Lord  would  not 
participate  in  its  blessings  and  glories.  Thus  their  apprehensions 
did  not  so  much  relate  to  the  resurrection  generally,  as  to  the  share 
which  the  departed  were  to  have  in  the  coming  of  the  Lord." ' 

As  little  open  to  question  are  the  four  following  propositions : 
(1)  The  Lord  will  come  from  heaven  with  signal  ac- 

Four  things  in    ^    '  .  x    rn  i    •      /- 1     •         i     1 1     '• 

the  Pauline  companiments.  (2)  Ihe  dead  m  Christ  shall  rise  first, 
doctrine.  ^3^  rj,|^^  living  saints  shall  be  caught  up  to  meet  the 

Lord.     (4)  Those  thus  glorified  shall  ever  be  with  the  Lord.     But 
while  all  agree  that  these  four  doctrines  are  clear  and  explicit  be- 
yond controversy,  there  has  been  wide  difference  of  opinion  as  to 
'  Commentary  on  St.  Paul's  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  455 

the  time  and  order  of  these  sublime  events.  Accoi'ding  to  one  class 
of  interpreters,  all  these  events  are  to  take  place  at  the  end  of  time, 
or  at  the  close  of  the  Messianic  era.  The  "we"  is  generic,  and 
does  not  therefore  imply  an  expectation  of  the  parousia  and  a  resur- 
rection within  the  lifetime  of  that  generation.  The  pre-raillennial- 
ists,  on  the  other  hand,  maintain  the  doctrine  of  two  resurrections, 
and  hold  that  the  dead  in  Christ,  and  no  others,  will  be  raised  at 
the  coming  of  the  Lord,  but  the  rest  of  the  dead,  according  to  Rev. 
XX,  5,  will  be  raised  at  the  end  of  the  millennium.  The  most  learned 
and  pious  interpreters,  whom  the  whole  Church  delights  to  honour, 
are  found  divided  in  opinion  and  taking  opposite  sides  in  this  great 
controversy. 

The  main  question,  which  logically  controls  all  others  in  the  case, 
is  whether  the  words,  "  we,  the  living,  who  remain  unto  ^^^  ^^^  j.g. 
the  coming  of  the  Lord"  (ver.  15,  comp.  ver.  17  and  main  aiive. 
1  Cor.  XV,  51,  52)  imply  an  expectation  that  Paul  and  his  contem- 
poraries might  live  to  witness  the  parousia.  That  they  do  imply 
such  an  expectation  is  the  judgment  of  many  of  the  best  interpre- 
ters, and,  perhaps,  it  may  be  said  that,  were  it  not  for  certain  dog- 
matic prepossessions,  no  one  would  ever  have  formed  a  contrary 
opinion.  "  From  the  construction  of  these  words,"  says  Liinemann, 
^'  it  uiidoubtcdly  follows  that  Paul  reckoned  himself  with  those 
who  would  survive  till  the  commencement  of  the  advent,  as  indeed 
the  same  expectation  is  also  expressed  in  1  Cor.  xv,  51."^  "Beyond 
question,"  says  Alford,  "he  himself  expected  to  be  alive,  together 
with  the  majority  of  those  to  whom  he  was  writing,  at  the  Lord's 
coming.  For  we  cannot  for  a  moment  accept  the  evasion  of  Theo- 
doret  (cf.  also  Chrysostom  and  the  majority  of  ancient  commen- 
tators, down  to  Bengel,  and  even  some  of  the  best  of  the  moderna, 
warped  by  their  subjectivities) :  'he  speaks  not  of  his  own  person, 
but  of  the  men  who  would  be  living  at  that  time ; '  nor  the  ungram- 
matical  rendering  of  Turretin  and  Pelt,  '  we,  if  we  live  and  remain ; ' 
nor  the  idea  of  CEcumenius,  that  the  living  are  the  souls,  those  fcdleti 
asleejy  the  bodies;  but  must  take  the  words  in  their  only  plain 
grammatical  meaning,  that  the  living  who  remain  are  a  class  dis- 
tinguished from  those  fallen  asleep,  by  being  yet  in  the  flesh  when 
Christ  comes,  in  which  class,  by  prefixing  we,  he  includes  his  read- 
ers and  himself."  ^ 

On  the  other  hand,  one  of  the  most  guarded  and  able  expressions 
of  the  opposite  opinion  is  that  of  Ellicott:  "The  deduction  from 
these  woi'ds,  that  St.  Paul  himself  expected  to  be  alive,  must  fairly 

'  Commentary  on  Thessalonians  (Meyer's  Crit.  Handbook),  in  loco. 
*  Greek  Testament,  in  loco. 


456  PRINCIPLES    OF 

be  pronounced  more  than  doubtful.     Without  giving  any  undue- 
,  latitude  to  ijudg,  ice,  or  to  TrepcAenrofMevoi,  those  retnain- 

servativejudg-  ing,  it  seems  just  and  correct  to  say  that  nepiXenronevoc 
™®°*"  is  simply  and  purely  present,  and  that  St.  Paul  is  to  be 

understood  as  classing  himself  with  those  who  are  bei?iff  left  on 
earth  (comp.  Acts  ii,  47),  without  being  conceived  to  imply  that  he 
had  any  precise  or  definite  exjjectations  as  to  his  own  case.  At  the 
time  of  writing  these  words  he  was  one  of  the  living  and  remahi- 
ing,  and  as  such  he  distinguishes  himself  and  them  from  the  fallen 
asleep,  and  naturally  identifies  himself  with  the  class  to  which  he 
then  belonged.  It  does  not  seem  improper  to  admit  that,  in  their 
ignorance  of  the  day  of  the  Lord  (Mark  xiii,  32),  the  apostles  might 
have  imagined  that  he  who  was  coming  would  come  speedily,  but 
it  does  seem  over  hasty  to  ascribe  to  insjjired  men  definite  expecta- 
tions, since  proved  to  be  unfounded,  when  the  context,  calmly 
weighed  and  accurately  interpreted,  supplies  no  certain  elements 
for  such  extreme  deductions." ' 

These  expressions  of  judgment  may  be  taken  as  specimens  of  the 
best  that  can  be  said  on  either  side  of  the  question.  It  is  worthy 
The  two  opin-  ^f  note  that  writers  of  the  one  class  exhibit  a  settled 
Ions  compared,  assurance  of  folloAving  the  most  obvious  imjjort  of  the 
apostle's  language,  whilst  those  of  the  opposite  class  manifestly 
feel  that  the  language  does  not  favour  their  view,  and  they  ac- 
cordingly either  plead  the  ignorance  of  the  apostle,  or  else  give  his 
words  an  unnatural  meanina:. 

Putting  aside  all  si)ecial  pleading  and  dogmatic  bias,  it  seems 
The  words  im-  hardly  doubtful  that  the  language  of  the  apostle  implies 

piyanexpecta-   an  expectation  that  many  of  his  generation  would  re- 

tionof  aspeedy  .        ,.  ^-i     i  •  <•     i       t       t       -«.x 

coming  of  the   mam  alive  until  the  coming  of  the  Lord.     No  one  can 

Lord.  fairly  claim  that  Paul's  language  implies  that  both  him- 

self and  all  those  to  whom  he  wrote  would  be  living  at  that  hour, 
for  what  he  says  about  them  that  "are  falling  asleep"  (ver.  1")  im- 
plies the  contrary.  So  also  his  words  in  1  Cor.  xv,  51,  "we  all  shall 
not  sleep,"  are  virtually  equivalent  to  "  some  of  us  will  sleep."  He 
intimates  that  he  himself  rather  expected  to  die  (1  Cor.  xv,  31,  32), 
and,  later  on,  this  expectation  became  a  positive  conviction  (Phil, 
iii,  7-11;  2  Tim.  iv,  6-8).  But  these  facts  and  considerations  do 
not  militate  against  the  opinion  that  his  language  in  the  passage  in 
question  clearly  implies  the  doctrine  of  the  speedy  coming  of  the 
Lord,  and  that  many,  if  not  most,  of  his  contemporaries  would  live 
until  that  glorious  event.  Ellicott  is  quite  correct  in  saying  that 
these  words  do  not  necessarily  imply  that  "Paul  himself  expected 

'  Commentary  on  1  Thess.  iv,  15. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  457 

to  be  alive,"  ana  Liinemann  and  Alford  are  altogether  too  positive 
in  their  language  on  this  point.  It  is  unnecessary  and  uncalled  for 
to  maintain  that  Paul  here  expresses  any  "definite  expectations" 
about  himself,  personally  (or  of  any  other  individual),  as  if  he  might 
not  fall  asleep  before  the  parousia.  "  He  was  one  of  the  living  and 
remaining,''''  as  Ellicott  says,  "and  naturally  identifies  himself  Avith 
the  class  to  which  he  then  belonged,"  but  when  one  argues  that  his 
language  does  not  imply  that  any  of  that  class  then  living  would 
remain  alive  until  the  Lord  came,  he  will  probably  have  the  unbi- 
assed judgment  of  the  best  critics  against  him.  This  is  virtually 
confessed  by  Ellicott  himself,  when  he  adds :  "  It  does  not  seem 
improper  to  admit  that  in  their  ignorance  of  the  day  of  the  Lord 
(Mark  xiii,  32)  the  apostles  might  have  imagined  that  he  who  was 
coming  would  come  speedily." 

How,  then,  are  we  to  understand  the  language  of  the  apostle  ? 
Shall  we  put  upon  his  words  an  unnatural  construction,  The  exegeticai 
or  say,  as  not  a  few  eminent  expositors  aflSrm,  that  Paul  dilemma. 
was  mistaken  in  his  expectations  ?  Here  is  a  dilemma,  and  it  has 
been  commonly  assumed  that  we  are  shut  up  to  the  one  or  the 
other  of  these  two  positions.  Calvin  and  Cornelius  a,  Lapide,  while 
assuming  that  the  apostle  knew  the  day  of  the  Lord  was  in  the  far 
future,  hold  that  he  represented  it  as  imminent  in  order  to  promote 
watchfulness  in  believers.  Few,  however,  will  accept  such  a  theory, 
for  it  virtually  makes  the  apostle  guilty  of  a  pious  fraud.  Nor  is  it 
consistent  with  sound  views  of  divine  inspiration  to  believe  that  the 
inspired  writers  were  mistaken  in  their  expectations  of  an  event  so 
important  in  Christian  doctrine  as  this.  The  plea  so  often  made, 
that  they  recognize  the  uncertainty  of  the  day  and  hour  of  the 
parousia,  is  futile,  inasmuch  as  all  they  say  on  this  point  is  perfectly 
consistent  with  a  speedy  coming  of  that  day.  Paul,  in  this  imme- 
diate context  (1  Thess.  v,  1-10),  speaks  of  the  imcertainty  of  "the 
times  and  the  seasons."  He  admonishes  the  Thessalonians  that  the 
day  comes  "  as  a  thief  in  the  night "  (as  if  referring  to  the  words  of 
the  Lord  himself  in  Matt,  xxiv,  42-44),  and  then  adds:  "But  ye, 
brethren,  are  not  in  darkness  that  that  day  should  overtake  you  as 
a  thief."  Were  these  w^ords  meant  for  the  Thessalonians,  or  for 
brethren  of  a  far  distant  age  ?  Or  can  they  mean:  Brethren,  ye  are 
in  no  danger  of  having  that  day  overtake  you  as  a  thief,  for  it  will 
not  come  until  untold  centuries  after  ye  have  all  fallen  asleep? 

If  it  be  held  that  the  apostles  were  mistaken  in  ex-  Apostles'  doc- 
pecting  the  parousia  in  their  own  day,  it  may  be  main-  y'^^,^f^|^^^o^^ 
tained  with  equal  and  indeed  greater  show  of  reason  emphatic  state- 
that  our  Lord  himself  was  responsible  for  their  error.   '^^'^'^- 


458  PRINCIPLES   OF 

No  words  of  tlieirs  are  more  specific  or  emphatic  than  the  assuring 
•declarations  of  Jesus  that  some  of  those  who  heard  him  speak 
shouhl  not  taste  of  death  till  they  beheld  the  Son  of  man  coming  in 
his  kingdom  (Matt,  xvi,  28),  and  that  generation  should  not  pass 
away  till  all  these  things  Avere  fulfilled  (Matt,  xxiv,  34).  We  reject, 
therefore,  the  idea  that  the  apostles  were  in  error  on  a  subject  on 
which  their  Lord  had  been  so  explicit  in  his  teachings.  Nor  can  we 
accept  the  other  alternative  of  the  dilemma,  above  stated,  and  con- 
strue the  language  of  Paul  so  as  to  make  it  harmonize  with  the  sup- 
position that  he  did  not  expect  himself  or  any  of  his  contemjjora- 
ries  to  remain  alive  until  the  coming  of  the  Lord. 

Is  there  no  other  way  to  understand  the  words  of  Paul  ?     Does 
^.     not  the  doctrine  of  our  Lord,  as  we  have  traced  it  in 

All  occurred  m  ' 

Pauls  genera-  the  Gospel  Apocalypse,  warrant  us  in  believing  that  all 
^^^'  these  sublime  events  occurred  at  that  momentous  crisis 

of  the  ages  when  Judaism  and  her  temple  fell  a  hopeless  ruin? 
Why  should  it  be  thought  a  thing  incredible  that  God  should  then 
have  raised  many  of  thera  that  slept  in  death  ?  Why  assume  that 
the  rapture  of  living  saints  must  needs  be  visible  to  all  mortal  eyes  ? 
The  parousia,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  was  to  take  place  at  the 
€nd  of  an  age,  and  not  to  involve  the  cessation  of  the  human  race 
on  earth.  Our  Lord  most  plainly  declared  that  then  some  should 
be  taken  and  some  should  be  left  (Matt,  xxiv,  40,  41),  and  as  we 
have  ah'eady  shown  (see  above,  p.  448),  there  is  no  sufficient  reason 
for  assuming  that  such  a  rapture  of  living  saints  must  have  been 
visible  to  those  who  were  left.'  The  ascension  of  our  Lord  into 
heaven  was  witnessed  by  no  great  multitude. 

'  "  It  is  strange,"  says-a  recent  writer,  "  that  so  great  incredulity  sliould  exist  respect- 
ing tlie  plain  sense  of  our  Lord's  declarations  on  this  subject.  Fulfilled  or  unfulfilled 
right  or  wrong,  there  is  no  ambiguity  or  uncertainty  in  his  language.  It  may  be  said 
that  we  have  no  evidence  of  such  facts  having  occurred  as  are  here  described — the 
Lord  descending  with  a  shout,  the  sounding  of  the  trumpet,  the  raising  of  the  sleep- 
ing dead,  the  rajjture  of  the  living  saints.  True;  but  is  it  certain  that  these  are  facts 
cognizable  by  the  senses?  Is  their  place  in  the  region  of  the  material  and  the  visible? 
As  we  have  already  said,  we  know  and  are  s\ire  that  a  very  large  portion  of  the  events 
predicted  by  our  Lord,  and  expected  by  his  apostles,  did  actually  come  to  pass  at  that 
very  crisis  called  "  the  end  of  the  age."  There  is  no  difference  of  opinion  concerning 
the  destruction  of  the  temple,  the  overthrow  of  the  city,  the  unparalleled  slaughter  of 
the  people,  the  extinction  of  the  nationality,  the  end  of  the  legal  dispensation.  But 
the  parousia  is  insejjarably  linked  with  the  destruction  Of  Jerusalem ;  and,  in  like 
manner,  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  the  judgment  of  the  "  wicked  generation,'' 
with  the  parousia.  They  are  different  parts  of  one  great  catastrophe  ;  different  scenes 
in  one  great  drama.  We  accept  the  facts  verified  by  the  historian  ov  titc  vord  of 
man  ;  is  it  for  (Christians  to  hesitate  to  accept  the  facts  which  are  vouched  by  the  word 
fif  Ihr  lA)nir'—T\\e  Parousia,  pp.  168,  169. 


BIBLICAL    IIERMENEUTICS.  45a 

But  it  is  said  Paul  wrote  his  Second  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians 

to  counteract  the  wrong  impressions  of  the  first,  and  to  show  tliat 

the  day  of  the  Lord  would  not  come  until  many  and 

-,  .     .  SThess.ii,  1-10 

great  events  had  first  taken  place.     All  this  is  conceded, 

and  yet  nothing  can  be  found  in  this  second  epistle  which  legiti- 
mately implies  either  that  the  parousia  would  not  be  in  that  genera- 
tion, or  that  any  statement  of  the  former  epistle  was  incorrect  or 
misleading.  The  most  that  can  be  made  of  the  apostle's  language 
is  that  the  parousia  was  not  so  immediately  present,  or  at  hand, 
that  they  should  suddenly  become  excited,  give  up  their  usual  occu- 
pations, and  refuse  to  work.  The  great  passage  of  this  epistle 
bearing  on  the  subject  reads  as  follows  (2  Thess.  ii,  1-10): 

(1)  But  we  beseech  you,  brethren,  concerning  the  coming  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  our  gathering  together  unto  him,  (2)  that  ye  be  not  quickly 
shaken  from  your  mind,  nor  yet  be  troubled  either  by  spirit,  or  by  word, 
or  by  epistle  as  from  us,  as  that  the  day  of  the  Lord  is  just  now  at  hand 
{tve(TT7]K€v  ^).  (3)  Let  no  one  deceive  you  in  any  way,  for  (it  will  not  come) 
except  there  come  the  apostasy  {r/  unoaTaala)  first,  and  there  be  revealed  the 
man  of  sin,-  the  son  of  perdition,  (4)  who  opposes  and  exalts  himself  a2:ainst 
all  that  is  called  God,  or  an  olnect  of  worship,  so  that  he  sits  down  in  the 
temple  of  God,  exhibiting  himself  that  he  is  God.  (5)  Do  ye  not  remember 
that  being  yet  with  you  I  told  you  these  tilings?  (6)  And  now  what  hin- 
ders ye  know,  for  the  purpose  of  his  being  revealed  in  his  own  time. 
(7)  For  the  mystery  of  lawlessness  is  already  working  only  until  he  who  now 
hinders  be  taken  out  of  the  way.  (8)  And  then  shall  be  revealed  the  law- 
less one,  whom  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  take  off  ^  by  the  breath  of  his  mouth, 
and  bring  to  naught  by  the  manifestation  of  his  coming;  (9)  of  wiiom  the 
voming  is  according  to  the  working  of  Satan  with  all  power  and  signs  and 
wonders  of  falsehood,  (10)  and  with  all  deceit  of  unrighteousness  for 
them  that  perish,  because  they  received  not  the  love  of  the  truth  that  they 
might  be  saved. 

Two  things,  according  to  this  Scripture,  must  take  place  before 
the  coming  of  the  Lord:    first,  the  apostasy,  some  notable  falling 

'  "  The  verb  eviGrTjKsv,"  says  Ellicott,  "is  somewhat  stronger  than  Heottikev  (2  Tim. 
iv,  6),  and  seems  to  mark  not  only  the  nearness,  but  the  actual  presence  and  com- 
mencement of  the  day  of  the  Lord." — Commentary  on  Thessalonians,  in  loco.  Ellicott 
translates  it  by  "is  now  commencing,"  or  "is  already  come;"  Lunemann:  "as  if  tlie 
day  of  the  Lord  is  already  present,  or  is  even  on  the  point  of  commencing ; "  Alford 
says :  "  These  Thessalonians  imagined  it  to  be  already  come,  and,  accordingly,  were 
deserting  their  pursuits  in  life,  and  falling  into  other  irregularities,  as  if  the  day  of 
grace  were  closed." — Greek  Testament,  in  loco. 

^  Tischendorf,  Tregelles,  Gebhardt,  Westcott  and  Hort,  following  codices  X  and  B, 
read  ri  ui/dpunog  rf/c  uvo/xiac,  the  man  of  lawlessness. 

^Tischendorf,  Tregelle^!,  Alford,  Gebhardt,  Westcott  and  Hort  read  uvelel,  will 
take  off  sicddenly,  will  seize  away.     Others  read  uvdKuaei,  ivill  consume. 


460  PRINCIPLES   OF 

away  from  God  and  the  true  religion;  and,  secondly,  the  revela- 
tion of  a  monster  of  wickedness  who  would  be  the  em- 

The     apostasy  ^  ,        ,  ->  •        •  a      r         i 

aneventofthat  bodiment  of  lawlessness  and  impiety.  As  tor  the  apos- 
generation.  tasy,  why  should  any  one  imagine  it  to  be  other  than  that 
going  astray  of  many,  of  which  the  Lord  spoke  repeatedly  in  his 
eschatological  sermon  (Matt,  xxiv,  5,  11,  12,  24).  He  foretold  how 
the  love  of  many  would  wax  cold;  false  Christs  and  false  prophets 
would  arise,  and  faith  in  the  true  Messiah  would  be  painfully  defi- 
cient at  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  (Luke  xviii,  8).  Such  apos- 
tasy became  notably  apparent  before  that  generation  passed  away 
(1  Tim.  iv,  1-3;  2  Tim.  iii,  1-9;  1  John  ii,  18,  19). 

But  who  is  "  the  man  of  sin,  the  son  of  perdition,"  to  be  revealed 

before  the  parousia?     The  language  by  which  he  is  de- 
Themanofsin.  .,,..,        ,  •  "^    j     /•  ta      •   i        i 

scribed  is  evidently  appropriated  trom  Daniel   where 

that  prophet  delineates  the  character  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  sym- 
bolized in  "the  little  horn"  of  chap,  vii,  8,  and  viii,  9-12."  Anti- 
ochus was  recognized  in  Jewish  history  as  a  typical  incarnation  of 
cruelty,  blasphemy,  and  lawlessness.  He  sought  to  "  wear  out  the 
saints  of  the  Most  High "  (Dan.  vii,  25).  "  He  exalted  and  mag- 
nified himself  above  every  god,  and  against  the  God  of  gods 
would  he  utter  wonderful  things"  (Dan.  xi,  36). 

Does  history  inform  us  of  any  such  monster  of  lawlessness  before 
the  close  of  the  Jewish  a3on?      Most  assuredly.      In 

Nero  a  re  vela-  /.     i       t        i  a       •       • 

tion  of  Anti-  Nero,  the  son  of  the  dissolute  Agnppina,  Avho  succeeded 
Christ.  Claudius  on  the  throne  of  the  Caesars,  we  find  every 

feature  of  this  dark  picture  verified.  The  power  and  vigilance  of 
Claudius  hindered  the  manifestation  of  this  son  of  perdition  "  until 
he  was  poisoned  by  his  infamous  wife,  the  mother  of  Nero,  and 
thus  taken  out  of  the  way.  Paul  might  well  have  told  the  Thessa- 
lonians  of  these  things  while  he  was  yet  with  them,  and  common 
prudence  dictated  that  he  should  not  write  more  explicitly  upon  the 
subject.  He  had  told  them  before,  and  now  admonishes  them 
acain,  that  the  cominij  lawless  one  would  be  like  another  Antiochus 
the  sinful.'     He  would  usurp  the  place  of  God,  and  exhibit  himself 

'CoiTip.  Dan.  vii,  24-26;  viii,  23-25;  xi,  21,  86-38,  and  our  exposition  on  pp.  410, 
411,  above. 

•■^  Bcnf^c'l  observes  (Gnomon,  in  loco):  "The  ancients  thought  that  Claudius  himself 
was  this  checiv ;  foi'  hence,  as  it  appears,  it  hajipened  that  they  considered  Nero, 
Claudius'  successor,  to  be  the  man  of  sin."  Grotius,  Le  Clerc,  Wetstein,  Whitby,  and 
others,  hold  that  this  prophecy  of  tlie  man  of  sin  was  fulfilled  before  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  wliii'h  event  they  also  regard  as  coincident  with  the  parousia. 

=*  Compare  tlie  exjircssion,  "  the  words  of  the  sinful  man  "  (rivtVwc  ufi'ipTcjTiov),  in 
1  Mace,  ii,  62,  wIkmc  the  allusion  is  to  Atilioclui.-:,  of  whom  cliiip.  i  speaks  so  largely. 
"The  day  of  Christ  does  not  come,"  says  Dcngel,  "unless  Daniel's  prediction  concern- 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  461 

as  an  object  of  worship.'  According  to  the  working  of  Satan  him- 
self, of  whom  he  seemed  the  veriest  incarnation,  he  made  use  of  all 
the  "power  and  signs  and  wonders  of  falsehood"  which  imperial 
authority  could  command  to  accomplish  his  purposes  of  wickedness 
and  cruelty,  until  he  was  finally  cut  oif  under  circumstances  of  ter- 
rible judgment,'^ 

Many  have  thought  that  the  language  of  the  apostle  is  too  highly 
wrought  to  be  applied  to  the  taking  off  of  Nero.  With  The  language 
what  propriety,  it  is  asked,  can  he  be  said  to  have  fallen   f°*  ""!'"!5i'^'': 

I       I-  J '  '  to  the  death  of 

by  the  breath  of  the  Lord  Jesus  and  by  the  appearance  Nero. 
of  his  coming  ?  The  question  springs  from  the  same  assumption  of 
literalism  as  when  it  is  asked,  concerning  Matt,  xxiv,  29-31,  When 
were  the  heavens  shaken,  and  the  Son  of  man  seen  on  the  clouds 
sending  forth  his  angels  with  the  sound  of  a  trumpet  ?  The  apos- 
tle, like  his  Lord,  simply  appropriates  the  language  and  style  of 
prophecy.  According  to  Daniel,  Antiochus,  the  beast  represented 
by  the  little  horn,  "  was  slain,  and  his  body  was  destroyed  and  given 
to  the  burning  flame"  (Dan.  vii,  11).  So,  too,  when  the  impious 
Herod  allowed  himself  to  be  honoured  as  a  god,  "immediately  an 
angel  of  the  Lord  smote  him,"  and  he  became  eaten  of  worms  (Acts 
xii,  22,  23).^  The  execution  of  providential  judgments  may  be  often 
wrought  by  unseen  messengers  of  God,  and,  in  the  case  of  Herod, 
where  human  eyes  saw  nothing  but  the  ravages  of  foul  disease,  there 
was  at  the  same  time  the  potent  ministrations  of  a  destroying  angel 
(comp.  Exod.  xii,  23;  2  Sam.  xxiv,  16).  The  visible  effects  of  divine 
judgment  were  terribly  manifest  both  in  the  taking  off  of  Nero  and 
in  the  unparalleled  miseries  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Verily 
the  righteous  blood  of  unnumbered  martyrs  was  visited  upon  that 
generation  (Matt,  xxiii,  35,  36),  and  where  the  inquiring  and  observ- 
ant historian  made  record  of  appalling  tribulation  and  woes,  the 
inspired  apostle  beheld  a  "  revelation  of  the  Lord  Jesus  from  heaven 

ing  Antiochus  be  so  fulfilled  (in  the  man  of  sin)  that  it  shall  even  better  suit  the  man 
of  sin  who  corresponds  to  Antiochus,  and  is  worse  than  he." — Gnomon  on  2  Thess.  ii,  4. 

'  It  is  well  kno\vn  that  the  persecuting  emperors  sought  to  compel  Christians  to 
worship  their  images.  The  following  words  of  Howson  are  worthy  of  note:  "'The 
image  of  the  emperor  was  at  that  time  the  object  of  religious  reverence ;  the  emperor 
was  a  deity  on  earth  (Dis  aqua  potestas,  Juv.  iv,  71);  and  the  worship  paid  to  liim 
was  a  real  worship  (see  Merivale's  Life  of  Augustus,  p.  159).  It  is  a  striking  thought 
that  in  those  times  (setting  aside  effete  forms  of  religion)  the  only  two  genuine  wor- 
ships in  the  civilized  world  were  the  worship  of  a  Tiberius  or  a  Claudius,  on  the 
one  hand,  and  the  worship  of  Christ  on  the  other." — Conybeare  and  Howson's  Life 
and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  vol.  i,  p.  56.     New  York,  1855. 

'  On  the  miserable  end  of  Nero's  life,  see  Merivale,  History  of  the  Romans  under 
the  Empire,  chap.  Iv. 

*  Compare  the  description  of  the  awful  death  of  Antiochus  in  2  Mace.  ix. 


463  PRINCIPLES  OP 

with  the  angels  of  his  power  iu  flaming  Are,  rendering  vengeance 
to  them  that  know  not  God  and  to  them  that  obey  not  the  Gospel " 
(2  Thess.  i,  7,  8). 

The  momentous  events,  therefore,  of  which  Paul  wrote  in  both 
Nero's  reia-   of  his  epistles  to  the  Thessalonians,  and  the  language 

tions  to  Juda-    ■     ^yiji(.|i  ^^  portravcd  them,  are  in  harmonv  with  what 

ism  and  Chns-  .  .  t  . 

tianity.      -       occurred  in  that  generation;  and  the  exposition,  wiiich 

we  have  briefly  outlined,  accords  with  the  most  natural  and  obvious 
import  of  the  ])rophecy.  "  But  the  question  may  be  asked,  Why 
should  the  revelation  of  Nero  in  his  true  chai-acter  be  a  matter  of 
such  concern  to  the  apostle  and  the  Christians  of  Thessalonica? 
The  answer  is  not  far  to  seek.  It  was  the  ferocity  of  this  lawless 
monster  that  first  let  loose  all  the  power  of  Rome  to  crush  and  de- 
stroy the  Christian  name.  It  was  by  him  that  torrents  of  innocent 
blood  were  to  be  shed,  and  the  most  exquisite  tortures  inflicted  upon 
unoffending  Christians.  It  was  before  his  sanguinary  tribunal  that 
St.  Paul  was  yet  to  stand  and  plead  for  his  life,  and  from  his  lips 
that  the  sentence  was  to  come  that  doomed  him  to  a  violent  death. 
It  was  iinder  Nero,  and  by  his  orders,  that  the  final  Jewish  war  Avas 
commenced,  and  that  darkest  chapter  in  the  annals  of  Israel  was 
opened  which  terminated  in  the  siege  and  capture  of  Jerusalem,  the 
destruction  of  the  temple,  and  the  extinction  of  the  national  polity. 
This  was  the  consummation  predicted  by  our  Lord  as  the  '  end  of 
the  age,'  and  'the  coming  of  his  kingdom.'  The  revelation  of  the 
man  of  sin,  therefore,  as  antecedent  to  the  parousia,  was  a  matter 
that  deeply  concerned  every  Christian  disciple."  ' 

Additional  features  of  the  Pauline  eschatology  are  seen  in  1  Cor. 
XV,  20-28: 

(20)  But  now  hus  Christ  been  raised  from  the  doad,  the  firstfniits  of  them 
who  have  fallen  asleep.  (21)  For  since  through  a  nianVlctith  (came),  also 
through  a  man  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  (22)  For  as  in  Adam  all  die, 
so  also  in  Christ  sliall  all  be  made  alive.  (23)  But  each  in  his  own  order 
(Tuyfiari,  company,  division,  as  of  an  army):  Christ  the  firstfruits,  tlien  they 
who  are  tiie  Christ's  at  his  coming;  (24)  afterward  the  end,  when  lie  gives 
over  the  kingdom  to  the  God  and  Father,  when  he  shall  have  abolished  all 
rule  and  all  authority  and  power;  (25)  for  he  must  reign  until  lie  has  jiut 
all  the  enemies  under  his  feet.  (26)  As  the  last  enemy,  death  shall  be  abol- 
ished; (27)  for  (as  it  was  written  in  Psa.  viii,  G)  all  things  he  put  under  his 
feet.  But  Avlien  he  says  that  all  things  are  put  under,  it  is  evident  that 
there  is  an  exception  of  him  who  put  all  things  under  him.  (28)  But  when 
he  shall  have  put  all  things  under  him,  then  also  shall  the  Son  himself  be- 
come subject  to  him  (tiie  Father)  who  put  all  things  under  him  (tlie  Sou) 
that  God  may  be  uU  things  in  all. 

'The  Parousia,  p.  ISY. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  463 

What  especially  demands  our  attention  here  is  the  doctrine  of 
successive  resurrections,  of  which  the  resurrection  of   ^.„ 

'  Different    and 

Christ  himself — a  fact  already  past  when  the  apostle  successive  res- 
wrote — is  the  fii'st  in  rank  and  order,  and  the  firstfruits  ^"■e''^i°°s- 
and  pledge  of  the  rest.'  All  the  dead  shall  be  raised,  according  to 
Paul,  but  they  will  come  forth  by  successive  companies;  Christ  first 
of  all,  for  "  he  is  the  beginning,  the  firstborn  from  the  dead,  that  he 
might  be  in  all  things  himself  pre-eminent"  (Col.  i,  18).  Then,  at 
the  parousia,  they  who  are  Christ's  shall  be  made  alive.  How  com- 
prehensive this  division  (rdy/ia)  may  be  is  quite  uncertain.  "  Those 
of  the  Christ  "  {ol  rov  Xgiarov,  the  [confessors]  of  the  Christ)  need 
not  in  this  connexion  mean  more  than  those  who  are  in  some  special 
sense  related  to  the  kingdom  and  glory  of  Christ.  We  naturally 
think  of  "  those  who  are  beheaded  for  the  testimony  of  Jesus,  and 
for  the  word  of  God,"  who  "have  part  in  the  first  resurrection," 
described  in  Rev.  xx,  4-6.  There  appears  no  sufficient  wairant  for 
making  this  company  include  all  the  righteous  dead  who  fall  asleep 
before  the  parousia.  The  language  employed  in  both  these  pas- 
sages denotes  at  most  only  a  select  portion  of  the  dead,  and  does 
not  designate  the  character  of  all  the  rest  of  the  dead  who  are  not 
made  alive  at  that  time.  "  Those  of  the  Christ  "  are  not  necessarily 
all  those  who  are,  or  have  been,  in  any  way  brought  into  saving  re- 
lations with  Christ.  "  Afterward  [elra,  not  tote)  the  end." 
What  end  ?  The  words  which  follow  show  that  the  end  of  the 
Messianic  reign  is  meant.  It  is  the  end  {reXaq)  which  will  come 
Avhen  Christ  delivers  over  the  kingdom  to  the  Father,  having  put 
down  all  his  enemies,  the  last  of  whom  to  be  abolished  is  death. 
Manifestly,  then,  it  is  the  close  of  the  Messianic  seen,  and  after  the 
millennium  of  Rev.  xx,  4,  for  how  could  they  reign  with  Christ 
after  he  had  given  over  the  kingdom  to  the  God  and  Father  ? 

According  to  Paul,  therefore,  a  resurrection  of  "those  of  the 
Christ"  takes  place  at  the  parousia.  This  accords  with  1  Thess. 
iv,  16,  17;  comp.  1  Cor.  xv,  52.  But  at  the  end  of  the  Messianic 
reign  all  the  rest  of  the  dead  will  be  made  alive,  for,  ultimately, 
the  resurrection  wnll  be  co-extensive  with  the  race  of  Adam;  "for 
as  in  Adam  all  die,  so  also  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive."  There 
is  nothing,  however,  in  this  part  of  the  apostle's  writings  to 
indicate  how  long  an  interval  may  separate  the  several  acts  or  stages 


I  <n 


'  Paul  regards  the  resurrection  of  all,"  says  Meyer,  "  including  Christ  himself,  as 
one  great  connected  process,  only  taking  place  in  several  acts,  so  that  thus  by  far  the 
greater  part  indeed  belongs  to  the  future,  but,  in  order  not  simply  to  the  completeness 
of  the  whole,  but  at  the  same  time  for  llie  sure  guarantee  of  what  was  to  come,  the 
imapxTj  (firstfruits)  also  may  not  be  left  unmentioned." 


464  PRINCIPLES   OF 

of  the  resurrection.  It  may  be  longer  or  shorter  as  the  Scriptures 
may  elsewhere  intimate  and  the  intervening  events  may  require. 

The  language  of  the  ajjostle  in  Phil,  iii,  10,  11  implies  the  doc- 
trine of  a  partial  and  special  resurrection.  He  speaks 
'  '  ■  of  his  ambition  and  longing  to  know  Christ,  "and  the 
power  of  his  resurrection,  and  fellowship  of  his  sufferings,  becom- 
ing conformed  to  his  death,  if  by  any  means  I  may  attain  unto  the 
resurrection  from  the  dead"  (el^  rfjv  e^avdaraoiv  ttjv  ek  veKQojv). 
Why  should  Paul  express  such  an  anxiety  to  attain  what  was  inev- 
itable ?  If  all  must  needs  rise  at  some  far  future  period,  at  the 
same  moment  of  time,  this  language  is  manifestly  inappropriate;  but 
if  a  resurrection  of  martyrs  and  distinguished  confessors  of  Christ 
was  to  take  place  at  the  parousia,  within  that  generation,  the  words 
have  a  pertinency  and  force  which  all  must  feel.' 

The  same  thought  is  suggested  in  the  words  of  Jesus,  Luke 
XX,  35:  "Those  who  are  reckoned  worthy  to  attain 
'  ■  (tvxsIv,  comp.  Heb.  xi,  35)  that  age,  and  the  resurrec- 
tion from  the  dead,  neither  marry  nor  are  given  in  marriage." 
These,  it  is  said  in  verse  3G,  "being  sons  of  the  resurrection,  are 
sons  of  God."  Meyer  here  remarks:  "  The  context  shows  that  Jesus 
has  in  view  only  those  who  are  to  be  raised,  apart  from  those  who 
are  still  living  here,  at  the  parousia."  ^  Godet  in  like  manner  says: 
"The  resurrection /rom  the  dead  is  very  evidentl)^  in  this  place, 
not  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  in  general.  What  is  referred  to  is 
a  special  privilege  gi'anted  only  to  the  faithful  who  shall  be  ac- 
counted Avorthy"  (comp.  xiv,  14,  and  Phil,  iii,  11).' 

Notice  also  in  this  connexion  the  language  of  John  v,  24-29: 

(24)  Veril}',  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  he  who  hears  my  word,  and  believes 
him  wlio  sent  me,  has  life  eternal,  and  into  judgment  comes  not,  but  has 
passed  from  death  uuto  life.  (25)  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  the  hour 
is  coming,  and  now  is,  wlien  the  dead  sliall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of 
<jrod,  and  tiiey  who  hear  shall  live.  (26)  For  as  the  Father  has  life  in  him- 
self, so  also  he  gave  to  the  Son  to  have  life  in  himself;  (27)  and  lie  gave 

'  "To  grant  a  particular  resurrection,"  says  Mede,  "before  the  general,  is  against 
no  article  of  faith,  for  the  Gospel  tells  us  that  at  our  Saviour's  resurrection  the  graves 
were  opened,  and  many  bodies  of  the  saints  which  slept  arose  and  went  into  the  holy 
<;ity,  and  appeared  unto  many  (Matt,  xxvii,  52,  R3).  Neither  was  the  number  of  them 
a  small  number,  if  we  may  credit  the  fathers  or  the  most  ancient  records  of  Christian 
tradition.  .  .  .  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  Chrysostoni,  and  others  suppose  this  resurrection 
to  have  been  common  to  all  the  saints  that  died  before  our  Saviour.  Howsoever  it 
be,  it  liolds  no  unfit  proportion  with  this  supposed  of  the  martyrs.  And  how  it 
doth  more  inipeacli  any  article  of  our  faith  to  think  that  may  be  true  of  martyrs 
which  we  heliove  of  patriarchs,  I  yet  see  not. — Works,  p.  004.     London,  1672. 

*  Critical  Commentary,  in  loco.  ^  Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  Luke,  in  loco. 


BIBLICAL    IIERMENEUTICS.  465 

liim  authority  to  execute  judgment,  because  he  is  Son  of  man.  (28)  Mar- 
vel not  at  this;  for  the  liour  is  coming  in  which  all  who  are  in  the  tombs 
shall  hear  his  voice  (29)  and  come  forth,  those  who  did  good  unto  a  resur- 
rection of  life,  those  who  wrought  evil  unto  a  resurrection  of  judgment. 

It  is  common  to  imderstand  verses  24-27  of  a  spiritual  resurrec- 
tion.   This  view,  however,  involves  a  needless  tautoloarv, 

John  V  24-29. 

and  fails  to  exhibit  the  noticeable  progress  of  thought  in 
the  passage.  A  spiritual  resurrection  is  set  forth  in  verse  24,  and 
is  explicitly  defined  as  a  passing  from  death  iinto  life.  But  verse  25, 
adds  with  emphasis  another  and  distinct  idea.  It  speaks  of  an 
"hour,"  both  present  and  yet  coming,  when  the  dead  (ol  veKQoi) 
shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  they  who  hear  (impli- 
edly a  select  number)  shall  live.  This  hearing  the  voice  (verse  25, 
comp.  verse  28)  of  the  Son  of  God  is  not  the  same  as  hearing  his  word 
(verse  24).  Therefore,  with  Olshaiasen  and  others,  we  understand 
the  spiritual  resurrection,  which  is  so  clearly  set  forth  in  verse  24, 
traced  onward  in  verses  25-27  to  a  higher  glorification  in  the  mak- 
ing alive  of  the  mortal  bodies  of  saints  through  the  indwelling 
Spirit  (Rom.  viii,  11),  and  the  power  of  God  (Matt,  xxii,  29). 
The  resurrection  of  the  righteous,  at  whatever  hour  it  takes  place, 
rests  upon  the  fact  that  they  have  heard  the  word  of  Christ,  be- 
lieved in  him  that  sent  him,  and  thereby  laid  hold  on  eternal  life. 
Thus  only  may  any  man  come  to  "know  the  power  of  his  resurrec- 
tion" (Phil,  iii,  10).  "The  hour  is  coming,  and  now  is,"  should  be 
explained  by  the  analogy  of  1  John  ii,  18,  "It  is  the  last  hour." 
It  is  a  Johannean  form  of  expression,  and  denotes  the  closing  pe- 
riod of  the  pre-Messianic  seon.  The  miracles  of  resurrection,  like 
that  of  Jairus'  daughter,  the  son  of  the  widow  of  Nain,  and  Laz- 
arus, exhibited  Jesus  at  that  "  hour  "  as  "  the  resurrection  and  the 
life"  (John  xi,  25).  The  many  saints  who  arose  with  him  (Matt, 
xxvii,  52,  53)  furnish  a  further  illustration  of  his  word,  and  the 
power  of  his  resurrection,  and  his  authority  to  "make  alive  whom 
he  will."  The  resurrection  of  the  confessors  of  the  Christ  at  his 
coming  (I  Cor.  xv,  23;  1  Thess.  iv,  16)  would  then  mark  the  ulti- 
mate consummation  of  that  "hour."  Verses  28  and  29  proceed  to 
designate,  as  all  admit,  the  resurrection  of  the  rest  of  the  dead, 
which  would  take  place  at  a  coming  hour,  which  was  not  then 
present  or  near  at  hand. 

Paul's  doctrine  of  the  parousia,  and  of  distinct  and  successive 
resurrections,  may  therefore  be  seen  to  rest  upon  the  authority  of 
the  teachings  of  Jesus,  and  is  in  essential  harmony  with  the  escha- 
tology  of  the  gospels. 
30 


466  PRLXCIPLES   OF 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

THE    APOCALYPSE    OF    JOHN. 

No  portion  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  has  been  the  subject  of  so  much 
controversy  and  of  so  many  varying  interpretations  as  the  Apoca- 
systems  of  in-  lyps©  of  John.  The  principal  systems  of  expositi(jn 
terpretation.  may,  however,  be  reduced  to  three,  which  are  commonly 
known  as  the  Preterist,  the  Continuous-Historical,  and  the  Futurist. 
The  Preterists  hold  that  the  larger  part  of  the  prophecy  of  this 
book  was  fulfilled  in  the  overthrow  of  Jerusalem  and  pagan  Rome. 
The  Continuous-Historical  school  of  interpreters  find  most  of  these 
prophecies  fulfilled  in  the  history  of  the  Roman  Empire  and  of 
modern  Europe.  The  Futurists  maintain  that  the  book  relates 
mainly  to  events  which  are  yet  to  come,  and  which  must  be  literally 
fulfilled  at  the  end  of  the  world.  Any  attempt  to  discuss  these 
systems  in  detail,  and  examine  their  numerous  divergent  methods, 
as  carried  out  by  individual  expositors,  would  require  a  very  large 
volume.  Our  plan  is  simply  to  seek  the  historical  position  of  the 
writer,  and  trace  the  scope  and  plan  of  his  book  in  the  light  of  the 
hermeneutical  principles  already  set  forth.  Especially  are  we  to 
regard  the  analogy  of  the  apocalyptic  scriptures  and  the  general 
principles  of  biblical  symbolism. 

The  writer  addresses  the  book  of  his  prophecy  to  the  churches 
Historical  ^f  seven  well-known  cities  of  western  Asia,  and  ex- 
standpoint,  pressly  declares  in  the  opening  verses  that  his  revela- 
tion is  of  "  things  which  must  shortly  come  to  pass."  At  the  close 
(chap,  xxii,  12,  20)  the  Alpha  and  the  Omega,  who  himself  testifies 
all  these  things,  and  manifestly  aims  to  make  the  thought  of  their 
imminence  emphatic,  says:  "  Behold,  I  come  quickly;"  "  Yea,  I  come 
quickly."  The  prophet,  moreover,  is  admonished  not  to  seal  "  the 
words  of  the  ])ropliecy  of  this  book,  for  the  time  is  near  at  hand  " 
(xxii,  10).  Surely,  if  words  have  any  meaning,  and  thoughts  are 
capable  of  emphatic  statement,  the  events  contemplated  were  im- 
pending in  the  near  future  at  the  time  this  book  was  written."    The 

'The  plea  of  Alford  and  others  that  the  iv  rdxei,  skorili/,  of  this  book  is  "a  meas- 
ure by  which,  not  our  judgment  of  its  contents,  hut  our  estimate  of  worldly  events 
and  their  duration,  should  be  corrected,"  and  that  the  word  "  confessedly  contains, 
among  other  periods,  a  period  of  a  thousand  years"  (Greek  Testament,  Prulcg.  to 
Eev.,  chap,  viii,  §§  4,  10),  is  a  singular  proposition.     He  might  as  well  have  said  th::t 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  467 

import  of  all  these  expressions  is  in  noticeable  hai'mony  with  our 
Lord's  repeated  declaration :  "  This  generation  shall  not  pass  away 
until  all  these  things  be  accomj^lished."  But  when  John  wrote, 
the  things  contemjolated  were  much  nearer  at  hand  than  when  Je- 
sus addressed  his  disciples  on  the  Mount  of  Olives.' 

After  the  manner  of  other  apocalypses  this  book  is  divisible  into 
two  principal  parts,  which  may  be  appropriately  desig-  pi^^  of  the 
nated,  (1)  The  Revelation  of  Christ,  the  Lamh  (chaps.  Apocalypse, 
i-xi),  and  (2)  The  Revelation  of  the  Bride,  the  Wife  of  the  Lamb 
(chaps,  xii-xxii).  These  two  parts,  after  the  manner  of  Daniel's  re- 
peated visions,  traverse  the  same  field  of  view,  and  each  terminates 
in  the  fall  of  a  great  city,  and  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of 
God.  But  each  of  these  parts  is  divisible  again  into  smaller  sec- 
tions, the  first  into  three,  the  second  into  seven.  The  whole  will 
be  apparent  in  the  following  outline : 

I.  Revelation  of  the  Lamb. 

1.  In  the  Epistles  to  the  Seven  Churches,  i-iii. 

2.  By  the  Opening  of  the  Seven  Seals,  iv-vii. 

3.  By  the  Sounding  of  the  Seven  Trumpets,  viii-xL 

II.  Revelation  op  the  Bride. 

1.  Vision  of  the  Woman  and  the  Dragon,  xii. 

2.  Vision  of  the  Two  Beasts,  xiii. 

3.  Vision  of  the  Mount  Zion,  xiv. 

4.  Vision  of  the  Seven  Last  Plagues,  xv,  xvi. 

5.  Vision  of  the  Mystic  Babylon,  xvii,  xviii, 

6.  Vision  of  Parousia,  Millennium,  and  Judgment,  xix,  xx. 

7.  Vision  of  the  New  Jerusalem,  xxi,  xxii. 

It  should  be  observed  that  John's  Apocalypse  is,  in  its  artificial 
arrangement  and  finish,  the  most  perfect  of  all  the  prophecies.     Its 

it  confessedly  contains  the  "  for  ever  and  ever  "  of  chap,  xxii,  5.  Manifestly  the  thou- 
sand years  of  chap,  xx,  2,  like  the  ages  of  ages  in  chaps,  xi,  15  and  xxii,  5,  is  a  state- 
ment that  runs  far  beyond  the  great  catastrophes  of  the  book,  and  is  too  exceptional 
in  its  nature  to  be  included  among  the  things  which  were  to  come  to  pass  quickly. 

'  On  the  early  date  of  the  Apocalypse  see  Glasgow,  The  Apocalypse  Translated  and 
Expounded,  pp.  9-54  (Edinb.,  1872);  Farrar,  The  Early  Days  of  Christianity,  chap, 
xxvii  (Loud.,  1882);  and  Schaff's  new  edition  of  his  History  of  the  Christian  Church, 
pp.  834-836.  We  have  already  discussed  at  some  length  the  time  of  this  prophecy 
(see  pp.  237-242),  and  have  shown  good  reasons  for  believing  that  it  was  written 
before  the  destruction  of  .Jerusalem  and  the  temple.  The  preponderance  of  the  l^e.st 
modern  criticism  is  in  favour  of  this  view.  If  now,  in  harmony  with  such  date,  we 
find  the  structure  and  import  of  the  book,  as  studied  in  the  light  of  biblical  apoca- 
lyptics,  a  self-consistent  whole,  and  meeting  signal  fulfilment  in  the  ruin  of  Judaism 
and  the  rise  of  Christianity,  the  interpretation  itself  becomes  a  controlling  aigument 
in  favour  of  the  early  date. 


468  PRINCIPLES   OF 

outline  and  the  correlation  of  its  several  parts  evince  that  its  iina- 
.    .„  .  ,  r         srerv  was  most  carefullv  chosen,  and  vet  there  is  scarcely 

Artitlcial  form    o      j  *        .  *  . 

of  the  Apoca-  a  figure  or  symbol  that  is  not  appropriated  from  tiie 
lypse.  Old"  Testament.      The  books  of  Daniel,   Ezekiel,  and 

Zechariah  are  especially  made  use  of.  The  number  seven  is  nota- 
bly prominent — as  seven  spirits,  seven  churches,  seven  seals,  seven 
trumpets,  seven  heads,  seven  eyes,  seven  horns,  seven  plagues.  The 
numbers  three,  four,  ten,  and  twelve  are  also  used  in  a  significant 
way,'  and  where  symbolical  numbers  are  so  frequently  used  we 
should  at  least  hesitate  about  insisting  on  the  literal  import  of  any 
particular  number.  Constant  reference,  therefore,  should  be  had,  in 
the  interpretation  of  this  book,  to  the  analogous  prophecies  of  the 
Old  Testament. 

Immediately  after  the  opening  statements,  and  the  salutation  and 
The  great  Theme  doxology  of  verses  4-6,  the  great  theme  of  the  book  is 
of  the  book.  announced  in  this  truly  Hebraic  and  emotional  style: 

'•  Behold  he  is  coming  with  the  clouds,  and  every  eye  shall  see  him," 
and  they  who  pierced  him,  and  all  the  tribes  of  the  land,*  shall  wail 
over  him  "  (chap,  i,  V).  Let  it  be  particularly  noted  that  these  words 
are  ai)propriated  substantially  from  our  Lord's  discourse  (Matt, 
xxiv,  ;J0):  "Then  shall  ai)pear  the  sign  of  the  Son  of  man  in  heav- 
en, and  then  shall  all  the  tribes  of  the  land  wail,  and  they  shall  see 
the  Son  of  man  coming  on  the  clouds  of  heaven  with  power  and 
much  glory."  The  words  "■  they  who  pierced  him  "  are  from  Zech. 
xii,  10,  and  should  here  be  understood  not  so  much  of  the  soldiers 

'  See  Stuart  on  the  "Numerosity  of  the  Apocalypse"  in  his  Commentary,  vol.  i,  pp. 
130-149.  Comp.  Trench,  Com.  on  the  Epistles  to  the  Seven  Churches  of  Asia,  pp. 
83-<)l. 

^  To  press  the  literal  import  of  the  words  "  every  eye  shall  see  him,"  and  insist  that 
at  the  ])arousia  Christ  must  literally  appear  on  a  cloud,  and  be  visible  to  every  person 
on  the  habitable  slobe,  involves  manifest  absurdities.  The  statement  of  the  angels  in 
Acts  i,  11,  is  that  the  Lord  would  come  again  in  lilvC  manner  as  the  disciples  beheld  him 
ijoiug  into  heaven ;  but  that  ascension,  like  the  appearance  of  the  angels,  was  visible 
to  only  a  chosen  few.  That  he  personally  came  again  in  that  generation,  and  was  seen 
by  multitudes,  and  by  those  who  were  guilty  of  his  blood,  we  accept  upon  the  testimony 
of  the  Scrij)tures.  But  no  person  or  phenomenon  in  the  clouds  of  heaven  could  be 
visible,  at  one  and  the  same  time,  to  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth ;  and  no  one  pre- 
tends that  the  Son  of  man  is  to  pass  through  tlie  clouds  and  make  the  circuit  of  the 
gl()l)e  so  as  to  appear  literally  to  every  eye.  The  words  of  Kcv.  i,  7,  are,  therefore,  to 
be  understood  in  general  harmony  with  both  the  temporal  and  geographical  limitations 
of  tlic  prophecy. 

^Tho  common  English  Version,  "all  kindreds  of  the  earth,"  appears  to  liave  misled 
not  only  many  common  readers,  but  even  learned  commentators.  No  Hellenist  of  our 
Lord's  day  would  have  understood  Kuaai  ai  (pvAal  tt/^  yf/f  as  equivalent  to  all  nations 
of  the  habitable  globe.  The  phrase  is  traceable  to  Zech.  xii,  12,  where  all  the  fami- 
lies of  the  land  of  Judiih  are  represented  as  mourning. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  4G'J 

who  nailed  him  to  the  cross,  and  pierced  his  side,  as  of  the  Jews, 
upon  whom  Peter  charged  the  crime  (Acts  ii,  23,  36;  v,  30),  and 
who  had  cried,  "  His  blood  be  upon  us  and  upon  our  children  "  (Matt. 
xxvii,  25).  To  these  Jesus  himself  had  said:  "Hereafter  ye  shall 
see  the  Son  of  man  sitting  at  the  right  hand  of  power,  and  coming 
on  the  clouds  of  heaven  "  (Matt,  xxvi,  64). 

Having  announced  his  great  theme,  the  writer  proceeds  to  record 
his  vision  of  the  Alpha  and  the  Omega,  the  first  and  words  to  the 
the  last — an  expression  taken  from  Isa.  xli,  4;  xliv,  6;  ^*^^®°  Churches, 
xlviii,  12.  The  description  of  the  Son  of  man  is  mainly  in  the  lan- 
guage by  which  Daniel  describes  the  Ancient  of  days  (Dan.  vii,  9) 
and  the  Son  of  man  (x,  5,  6),  but  it  also  appropriates  expressions 
from  other  prophets  (Isa.  xi,  4;  xlix,  2;  Ezek.  i,  26,  28;  xliii,  2). 
The  seven  golden  candlesticks  remind  us  of  Zechariah's  one  golden 
candlestick  with  its  seven  lamps  (Zech.  iv,  2).  The  meaning  of  the 
symbols  is  given  by  the  Lord  himself,  and  the  whole  forms  an  im- 
pressive introduction  to  the  seven  epistles.  These  epistles,  though 
written  in  a  most  regular  and  artificial  form,  are  full  of  individual 
allusions,  and  show  that  there  was  much  persecution  of  the  faith- 
ful, and  that  a  momentous  crisis  was  at  hand.  The  various  charac- 
teristics of  the  seven  Churches  may  be  typical  of  varying  phases  of 
church  life  and  character  for  subsequent  ages,  but  they  are  never- 
theless distinct  portraiture.s  of  then  existing  facts.  The  mention 
of  Nicolaitans  (ii,  6),  the  faithful  martyr  Antipas  (ii,  13),  and  the 
mischievous  prophetess  Jezebel  (ii,  20),  is  evidence  that  the  epistles 
deal  with  actual  persons  and  events,  though  the  names  employed  are 
probably  symbolical.  The  warnings,  counsels,  and  encouragements 
given  to  these  Churches  correspond  in  substance  with  those  our 
Lord  gave  to  his  disciples  in  Matt.  xxiv.  He  warned  them  against 
false  prophets,  told  them  they  should  have  tribulation,  and  some 
would  be  put  to  death,  and  the  love  of  many  would  wax  cold,  but 
that  he  who  endured  to  the  end  should  be  saved.  It  is  not  to  be 
supposed  that  in  this  remoteness  of  time  we  can  feel  the  force  of 
the  personal  allusions  of  these  epistles  as  well  as  those  to  whom 
they  Avere  first  addressed. 

The  prophecy  of  the  seven  seals  is  opened  by  a  glorious  vision 

of  the  throne  of  God  (chap,  iv),  and  its  symbols  are 

.   .  .  The  Seven  Seals, 

taken  from  the  corresponding  visions  of  Isa.  vi,  1-4, 

and  Ezek.  i,  4-28.     Then  appears  in  the  right  hand  of  Him  who  sat 

on  the  throne  a  book  close  sealed  with  seven  seals  (v,  i).     The  Lion 

of  Judah,  the  Root  of  David,  is  the  only  one  who  can  open  that 

book,  and  he  is  revealed  as  "  a  Lamb  standing  as  though  it  had  been 

slain,  having  seven  horns  and  seven  eyes."     His  position  was  "  in 


470  PRINCIPLES   OF 

tlie  midst  of  the  throne"  (v,  6).  The  eyes  and  horns,  symbols  of 
the  perfection  of  wisdom  and  power,  the  appearance  of  a  slain 
lamb,  expressive  of  the  whole  mystery  of  redemption,  and  the  posi- 
tion in  the  throne,"  as  suggestive  of  heavenly  authority — all  serve 
to  extol  the  Christ  as  the  great  Revealer  of  divine  mysteries.  The 
first  four  seals  correspond  virtually  with  the  symbols  of  Zech,  vi, 
2,  3,  and  denote  dispensations  of  conquest,  bloodshed,  famine,  and 
aggravated  slaughter  or  mortality.^  These  rapidly  successive  and 
(•ommingling  judgments  correspond  strikingly  with  our  Lord's  pre- 
diction of  wars  and  rumours  of  wars,  falling  by  the  edge  of  the 
sword,  famines,  pestilences,  terrors,  days  of  vengeance,  and  unheard 
of  horrors.  The  pages  of  Josephus,  descriptive  of  the  unparalleled 
woes  which  culminated  in  the  utter  ruin  of  Jerusalem,  furnish  an 
ample  commentary  on  these  symbols  and  on  the  words  of  our  Lord. 
Wh.y  should  we  ignore  the  statements  of  the  Jewish  historian,  and 
search  in  the  pages  of  Gibbon,  or  in  the  annals  of  modern  Europe, 
to  find  the  fulfilment  of  prophecies  which  were  so  signally  fulfilled 
before  the  end  of  the  Jewish  age  ? 

The  fifth  seal  is  a  martyr-scene — the  blood  of  souls  crying  from 
The  Martyr-  under  the  altar  where  they  had  been  slain  for  the  Word 
Scene.  Qf  Qq^j  ^yj^  9^  jq^      This  corresponds  with  the  Lord's 

announcement  that  his  followers  should  be  put  to  death  (Matt, 
xxiv,  9;  Luke  xxi,  16).  The  white  robes  and  the  comfort  given  to 
the  martyrs  answer  to  Jesus'  pledge  that  in  their  patience  they 
should  win  their  souls  (Luke  xxi,  19),  and  that  "whosoever  shall  lose 
his  life  for  my  sake  and  the  Gos^jel's  shall  save  it"  (Mark  viii,  35). 
But  these  souls  wait  only  for  "a  little  time"  (ver.  11),  even  as  Jesus 
declared  that  all  the  martyr-blood  shed  from  the  time  of  Abel 
should  be  visited  in  vengeance  upon  that  generation,  even  upon  Je- 
rusalem the  murderess  of  prophets  (Matt,  xxiii,  34-38).  And  then, 
to  show  how  quickly  the  retribution  comes,  like  the  "  immediately 
after  the  tribulation  "  of  Matt,  xxiv,  29,  the  sixth  seal 

The  Sixth  S63.1 

is  opened,  and  exhibits  the  terrors  of  the  end  (verses 
12-1 7).  We  need  not  linger  to  show  how  the  symbols  of  this  seal 
correspond  with  the  language  of  Jesus  and  other  prophets  when 
describing  the  great  and  terrible  day  of  the  Lord.  But  we  sliould 
note  that  before  this  judgment  falls  the  elect  of  God  are  sealed, 

■  In  cliap.  xxii,  1,  it  is  called  "the  throne  of  God  and  of  the  Lainb."  The  throne 
belonged  to  the  Liiinb  as  well  as  to  God.     Comp.  chap,  ili,  21. 

*  To  understand  the  rider  on  the  white  horse  as  a  symbol  of  Christ,  as  many  do, 
and  the  others  as  symbols  of  war,  famine,  etc.,  involves  the  interpretation  in  manifest 
confusion  of  imagery.  If  the  first  rider  denote  a  person,  so  should  the  others ;  but, 
according  to  the  analogy  of  corresponding  prophecies,  we  have  here  a  fourfold  symbol 
of  impending  judgments.     Corap.  above,  pp.  429,  430. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  471 

and  there  appear  two  companies,  the  elect  of  the  twelve  tribes  (the 
Jewish-Christian  Church — the  circumcision),  and  an  innumerable 
company  out  of  all  nations  and  tongues  (the  Gentile  Church — the 
uncircumcision)  who  had  washed  their  robes  and  made  them  white 
in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb  (chap.  vii).  This  is  tlie  apocalyptic  coun- 
terpart of  Jesus'  words:  "He  shall  send  forth  his  angels  with  a 
great  trumpet-sound,  and  they  shall  gather  his  elect  from  the  four 
winds,  from  one  end  of  heaven  to  the  other"  (Matt,  xxiv,  31). 

The  opening  of  the  sixth  seal  brought  us  to  the  very  verge  of 
doom,  and  we  might  naturally  suppose  that  the  seventh  xhe  seven 
would  usher  in  the  ultimate  consummation.  But  it  Trumpets, 
issues  in  the  vision  of  the  seven  trumpets,  which  traverses  a  part  of 
the  same  field  again,  and  awfully  portrays  the  signs,  wonders,  and 
horrors  indicated  by  the  symbols  of  the  sixth  seal.  These  trumpet 
woes  we  understand  to  be  a  highly  wrought  picture  of  the  fearful 
sights  and  great  signs  from  heaven  of  which  Jesus  spoke,  the  abom- 
ination of  desolation,  Jerusalem  compassed  with  armies,  and  "  signs 
in  the  sun  and  moon  and  stars;  and  upon  the  land  distress  of  na- 
tions in  perplexity  for  the  roaring  of  the  sea  and  the  billows;  men 
fainting  for  fear  and  for  expectation  of  the  things  coming  on  the 
world"  (Luke  xxi,  25,  26).^  Accordingly,  the  first  four  trumpet- 
Avoes  fall,  respectively,  on  the  land,  the  sea,  the  rivers  and  fountains 
of  Avater,  and  the  lights  of  heaven,  and  their  imagery  is  appropri- 
ated from  the  account  of  the  plagues  of  Egypt,  and  from  other 
parts  of  the  Old  Testament.  These  plagues  do  not  ruin  everything, 
but,  like  Ezekiel's  symbols  (Ezek.  v,  2),  each  destroys  a  third. 

The  last  three  trumpets  ai'e  signals  of  direr  woes  (viii,  13).  The 
tormenting  locusts  from  the  abyss,  introduced  by  the  xhe  plague 
fifth  trumpet,  assume  the  form  of  a  moving  army,  after  from  the  abyss. 
the  manner  of  Joel's  description  (Joel  ii,  1-11),  and  are  permitted 
to  torment  those  men  who  have  not  the  seal  of  God  upon  them. 
They  may  appropriately  denote  the  unclean  spirits  of  demons, 
which  were  permitted  to  come  forth  in  those  days  of  vengeance 
and  possess  and  torment  the  men  who  had  given  themselves  over  to 

'  "  The  descriptions  are  of  a  kind,"  says  Bleek,  "  that  cannot  be  meant  literally, 
since  they  cannot  be  shaped  into  intuitive  ideas.  But  it  is  also  inadmissible  to  refer 
them  to  single  political  events  and  catastrophes  happening  upon  the  earth,  either  at 
the  time  of  the  writing,  so  that  the  seer  must  have  had  them  already  before  his  eyes, 
or  occurring  later,  so  that  these  visions  were  fulfilled  in  them.  Rather  should  we 
view  the  contents  of  these  visions  as  a  general  poetical  representation  of  the  great 
revolutions  of  nature  connected  with  the  appearing  of  the  Lord,  or  preceding  it,  in 
which  Old  Testament  images,  taken  particularly  from  the  narrative  of  the  Egyptian 
plagues,  lie  at  the  foundation,  and  particulars  should  not  be  especially  urged." — Lec- 
tures on  the  Apocalypse,  p.  228.     Lond.,  1874. 


473  PRINCIPLES   OF 

all  wickedness.  Describing  the  excessive  impiety  of  the  Jewish 
leaders,  Josephus  remarks:  "No  age  ever  bred  a  generation  more 
fruitful  in  wickedness  than  this  was  from  the  beginning  of  the 
world."  "  I  suppose  that  had  the  Romans  made  any  longer  delay 
in  coming  against  these  villains  the  city  would  either  have  been 
swallowed  up  by  the  ground  opening  upon  them,  or  been  over- 
whelmed by  water,  or  else  been  destroyed  by  such  thunder  as  the 
country  of  Sodom  perished  by;  for  it  had  brought  fox'th  a  genera- 
tion of  men  much  more  atheistical  than  were  those  that  suffered 
such  punishments;  for  by  their  madness  it  was  that  all  the  people 
came  to  be  destroyed." '  Was  not  some  fact  like  this  before  the 
mind  of  our  Lord  when  he  spoke  of  the  unclean  spirit  that  took 
seven  others  more  wicked  than  himself,  and  returned  and  entered 
the  house  from  which  he  had  been  cast  out  ?  "  So  shall  it  be,"  said 
he,  "  with  this  wicked  generation  "  (Matt,  xii,  43-45).^ 

The  sixth  trumpet  is  the  signal  for  unloosing  the  armies  restrained 
The  aimies  of  "  ^^  tlie  great  river  Euphrates"  (ix,  14),  All  proper 
Euphrates.  names  of  this  book  appear  to  be  symbolical.  So  we 
understand  Sodom  and  Egypt  (xi,  8),  Michael  (xii,  7),  Zion  (xiv,  1), 
Ilar-Magedon  (xvi,16),  Babylon  (xvii,  5),  and  New  Jerusalem  (xxi,  2). 
It  would  be  contrary  to  all  these  analogies  to  understand  the  name 
Euphrates  (in  ix,  14,  and  xvi,  12)  in  a  literal  sense.  In  chap,  xvii,  1 
the  mystic  Babylon  is  represented  as  sitting  upon  many  waters,  and 
these  waters  are  explained  in  verse  15  as  symbolizing  peoples  and 
multitudes  and  nations  and  tongues.^  What  more  natural  explana- 
tion of  this  symbol,  then,  than  to  understand  it  of  the  multitudinous 
armies,  which  in  their  appointed  time  came  with  their  prowess  and 
terror,  compassed  the  Jewish  capital  about,  and  pressed  the  siege 
with  unrelenting  fury  to  the  bitter  end  ?  The  Roman  army  was 
composed  of  soldiers  from  many  nations,  and  fitly  corresponds  with 
the  abomination  of  desolation  spoken  of  in  our  Lord's  discourse 
(Matt,  xxiv,  15).  "  When  ye  see  Jerusalem  compassed  with  armies, 
then  know  that  her  desolation  is  at  hand  "  (Luke  xxi,  20). 

At  this  momentous  point  in  the  revelation,  and  when  we  might 

'  Whiston's  Josephus ;  Wars,  book  v,  chapters  x,  5,  and  xiii,  6. 

^  The  star  fallen  from  heaven,  to  whom  is  given  the  key  of  the  pit  of  the  abyss, 
can  scarcely  denote  any  other  than  the  Satan  whom  Jesus  saw  falling  like  lightning 
from  heaven  (Luke  x,  18),  and  the  names  Abaddon  and  Apollyon  are  but  symbolic 
names  of  Satan,  the  prince  or  chief  of  the  demons.  It  should  be  noticed  also  that  in 
chap,  xviii,  2  the  fallen  Babylon  is  described  as  having  "  become  a  habitation  of  de- 
mons, and  a  hold  of  every  unclean  spirit,  and  a  hold  of  every  unclean  and  hateful 
bird." 

'  That  Euphrates  is  here  to  be  taken  as  a  symbolical  name  is  ably  shown  by  Fair- 
bairn,  Prophecy,  etc.,  pp.  410,  411,  and  Appendix  M. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  473 

naturally  expect  the  seventh  trumpet  to  sound,  there  is  a  pause,  and 
lo,  "  another  strong  angel,  coming  down  from  the  heav-  The  miRbty 
en,  arrayed  with  a  cloud,  and  the  rainbow  upon  his  witb^^cioucTand 
head,  and  his  face  as  the  sun,  and  his  feet  as  pillars  of  rainbow. 
fire"  (x,  1).  The  attributes  of  this  angel,  and  their  correspondence 
with  the  sublime  description  of  the  Son  of  man  in  chap,  i,  12-16, 
point  him  out  as  no  other  than  the  Lord  himself,'  and  his  lion-like 
cry,  and  the  accompanying  voices  of  the  seven  thunders,  remind 
us  of  Paul's  prophecy  that  "the  Lord  himself  shall  descend  from 
heaven  with  a  shout,  with  voice  of  archangel,  and  with  trump  of 
God  "  (1  Thess.  iv,  16).  This  is  no  other  than  "  the  Son  of  man  com- 
ing in  the  clouds  of  heaven  with  power  and  great  glory,"  which  Je- 
sus himself  foretold  as  destined  to  come  to  pass  in  that  generation 
(Matt,  xxiv,  30-34).  His  glorious  appearance  seems  like  a  prelude 
to  the  sound  of  the  last  trumpet,  but  the  delay  is  not  to  defer  the 
catastrophe,  but  to  furnish  an  opportunity  to  say  that  with  the 
voice  of  the  seventh  angel  the  mystery  of  God  is  to  be  finished 
(vei'ses  6  and  7).  The  prophet  also  takes  a  book  from  the  angel's 
hand  and  eats  it  (8-11)  after  the  manner  of  P^zekiel  (ii,  9-iii,  3),  and 
is  told  that  he  shall  "  prophesy  again  over  many  peoples  and  nations 
and  tongues  and  kings."  For  John  survived  that  terrible  catas- 
trophe,  and  lived  long  after  to  make  known  the  testimony  of  God. 
It  was  more  than  a  suggestion  that  that  disciple  should  tarry  till 
the  coming  of  the  Lord  (corap.  John  xxi,  21-24).  The  measure- 
ment of  the  temple,  altar,  and  worshippers  (xi,  1),  and  the  treading 
under  foot  of  the  holy  city  forty-two  months  (three  years  and  a 
half=a  time,  times,  and  a  half  a  time),  signify  that  the  whole  will 
be  given  over  to  desolation.  This,  again,  corresponds  with  our 
Lord's  words  (Luke  xxi,  24):  "Jerusalem  shall  be  trodden  down  of 
the  Gentiles  until  the  times  of  the  Gentiles  be  fulfilled."  Judging 
from  the   analogy  of  the  language  of  Daniel,  the   "times  of  the 

'  It  is  in  accord  with  the  habit  of  repetition  common  to  apocalyptic  prophecies  that 
the  Son  of  man  should  appear  in  this  book  under  various  forms.  First  the  glorious 
Christophany  of  chap,  i,  then  as  the  Lamb  with  seven  horns  and  seven  eyes  (v,  6), 
then  as  the  mighty,  rainbow-encircled  Angel  of  this  passage  (x,  1),  then  as  Michael 
(xii,  1),  and  again  as  a  Lamb  (xiv,  1),  and  as  the  Son  of  man  on  a  cloud  (xiv,  14), 
then  as  the  rider  on  the  white  horse  (xix,  11),  and  finally  as  the  Judge  sitting  on  a 
great  white  throne  (xx,  11).  Thus  the  Apocalypse  of  Jesus  Clirist  fittingly  reveals 
him  in  manifold  aspects  of  his  character  and  glory.  So,  also,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
arch-enemy,  or  antichrist,  appears  under  various  forms  of  manifestation,  as  Abaddon, 
or  ApoUyon,  the  angel  of  the  abyss  (ix,  11),  the  great  red  dragon  (xii,  3),  the  beast 
out  of  the  sea  and  out  of  the  land  (xiii,  1,  11),  the  scarlet-coloured  beast  on  which  the 
harlot  is  sitting  (xvii,  3),  the  beast  out  of  the  abyss  (xvil,  8 ;  comp.  xi,  7),  and  evea 
the  mystic  Babylon  considered  as  a  habitation  of  devils  (xviii,  2). 


474  PRINCIPLES   OF 

Gentiles"  {KaiQol;  comp.  Luke  xxi,  24,  with  the  Septuagint  ami 
Theodotion  of  Dan.  vii,  25;  xi,  V)  are  the  "time,  times,  and  half  a 
time"  durino-  which  the  destructive  siege  was  to  continue,  and  the 
city  be  trodden  without  and  within.  During  these  same  times  the  two 
witnesses  prophesy  within  the  doomed  city.  Who  these  witnesses 
were  v>'e  cannot  now  tell,  for  history  has  left  no  more  record  of  them 
than  of  Antipas,  the  faithful  witness  of  Pergamum  (chap,  ii,  13).' 

With  this  revelation,  Avhich  stands  as  an  episode  between  the 
sixth  !ind  seventh  trumpets,  we  are  the  more  fully  prepared  to  feel 
Tbe  lasttrum-  *'^^  tremendous  significance  of  the  last  trumpet.  In  that 
pet.  lingering  liour  of  the  sixth  trumpet — an  awful  pause 

before  the  final  blast — "  There  Avas  a  great  earthijuake,  and  the 
tenth  part  of  the  ciiy  fell."  It  would  not  be  difficult  to  cite  from 
the  ])a"-es  of  Josephus  an  almost  literal  fulfilment  of  tliese  words." 
The  imagery  has  allusion  to  the  trumpet  signaled  fall  of  Jericho. 

'  The  allusion  to  Zech.  iv,  as  shown  above  (p.  352),  may  suggest  that  these  were  two 
notable  persons  who  alone  remained  in  the  city  after  the  other  Christians  had  fled. 
These  thus  became  the  sole  representatives  there  of  the  Christian  Church.  The  author 
of  the  Parousia  gives  several  plausible  reasons  for  supposing  that  they  were  none  other 
than  James  and  Peter — the  apostles  of  the  circumcision,  who  abode  in  Jerusalem  to 
the  last.     See  the  Parousia,  pp.  430-444. 

^  See  Josephus,  Wars,  book  iv,  chap,  iv,  5,  and  chap,  v,  1.  If  any  one  would  see 
the  fanciful  and  arbitrary  hermeneutical  methods  into  which  some  of  the  continuous- 
historical  interpreters  of  the  Revelation  unconsciously  involve  themselves,  let  him 
note  the  following  from  Faber :  "  The  great  city  (mystic  Babylon)  is  said  to  compre- 
hend ten  different  parts,  or  streets,  which  answer  to  the  ten  horns  of  the  first 
apocalyptic  wild  beast,  and  which  denote  the  ten  kingdoms  of  the  divided  Roman 
Empire;  for,  since  one  tenth  part  of  the  great  city  is  thrown  down  by  an  earthtpiake 
-at  the  close  of  the  second  woe,  such  language  necessarily  implies  a  division  into  ten 
parts.  The  same  great  city  is  viewed  also  under  two  different  aspects,  according  to 
its  wider  and  its  narrower  extent.  As  a  literal  city  may,  at  one  time,  comprehend 
within  its  walls  a  mucli  larger  tract  of  land  than  it  does  at  another  time,  whence  a 
district  which  was  formerly  within  it  may  be  subsequently  without  it;  so  the  allegor- 
ical great  city  is  variously  spoken  of,  according  as  in  point  of  geography  it  is  variously 
coiitcniplated.  On  this  i)rinciple  the  jilatform  of  the  ten  streets,  though  it  constituted 
the  whole  city  when  viewed  in  reference  to  the  ecclesiastical  authority  exercised  from 
its  palace  or  centre,  constituted  but  a  part  of  it  when  viewed  in  reference  to  the  wide 
dominions  of  the  Roman  Caesars ;  and  on  the  same  principle,  any  province  which  lies 
))eyond  the  geographical  limits  of  the  ten  streets  may  be  truly  described  as  being 
•either  within  or  without  the  city.  In  this  same  manner,  accordingly,  we  find  the 
province  of  Judea  spoken  of.  Our  Lord  is  said  to  have  been  crucified  within  the 
great  city,  because  he  was  crucified  in  the  province  of  Judea,  at  that  time  within  the 
limits  of  the  Roman  Empire  [so  was  Britain !  Surely  a  remarkable  way  of  telling 
where  the  Lord  was  crucified] ;  yet  is  that  identical  province  described  as  being  with- 
out the  great  city  (Rev.  xi,  8;  xiv,  20),  because  it  lies  without  the  jdatform  of  the 
ten  streets  which  constitute  the  proper  Western  Empire,  or  Latin  Patriarchate." — 
The  Sacred  Calendar  of  Prophecy  (3  vols.,  Lond.,  1828),  vol.  i,  pp.  31,  32.  Comp. 
other  specimens  in  Farrar,  The  Early  Days  of  Christianity,  pp.  434,  435. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  475 

Next  and  "quickly"  (xi,  14)  the  last  trumpet  sounds,  and  great 
voices  in  the  heaven  say  "The  kingdom  of  the  world  is  become 
our  Lord's  and  his  Christ's,  and  he  shall  reign  unto  the  ages  of  the 
ages"  (ver.  15).  The  old  seon  has  passed,  the  new  one  has  begun, 
and  the  heavenly  host  shout  a  pcean  of  triumph.  The  blood  of  the 
souls  that  cried  from  under  the  altar  (vi,  10)  is  now  avenged,  and 
those  proi)hets  and  saints  receive  their  reward  (xi,  18).  The  old 
temple  disappears,  and  the  temple  of  God  which  is  in  heaven  opens, 
and  reveals  the  long-lost  ark  of  the  covenant  (ver.  19),  henceforth 
accessible  to  all  who  are  washed  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb. 

The  second  part  of  the  Apocalypse  (chaps,  xii-xxii)  is  not  a 
chronological  sequel  to  the  first,  but  travels  over  the   „^  ,     , 

\  The  second  part 

same  ground  again.  The  two  parts  have  a  relation  to  of  the  Apoca- 
each  other  somewhat  like  the  dream  of  the  great  image  l^^nVthrnrst 
and  the  vision  of  the  four  beasts  in  the  Book  of  Daniel,  under  other 
They  cover  the  same  field  of  vision,  but  view  things 
under  different  aspects.  The  first  part  exhibits  the  terrible  ven- 
geance of  the  Lamb  upon  his  enemies,  as  if  contemplating  every- 
thing from  the  idea  of  the  king  "  Avho  sent  forth  his  armies  and  de- 
stroyed those  murderers,  and  burned  their  city  "  (Matt,  xxii,  V).  The 
second  part  presents  a  vivid  outline  of  the  struggling  Church  pass- 
ing her  first  crisis,  and  rising  through  persecution  and  danger  to 
triumph  and  glory.  The  same  great  struggles  and  the  same  fearful 
catastrophe  appear  in  each  part,  though  under  different  symbols. 

By  the  woman,  in  chap,  xii,  1,  we  understand  the  apostolic  Church; 
the  man-child  (ver.  5)  represents  her  children,  the  ad-  -j.j,e  woman 
herents  and  faithful  devotees  of  the  Gospel.  The  im-  and  the  Dragon, 
agery  is  taken  from  Isa.  Ixvi,  7,  8.  These  are  the  children  of  "  the 
Jerusalem  which  is  above,"  and  which  Paul  calls  "our  mother" 
(Gal.  iv,  26).  The  statement  that  this  child  was  to  rule  all  nations 
with  a  rod  of  iron,  and  be  caught  up  to  the  throne  of  God,  has  led 
many  to  suppose  that  Christ  is  designated.  But  the  language  of 
the  promise  to  the  church  of  Thyatira  (chap,  ii,  26,  27),  and  the 
vision  of  the  martyrs  who  live  and  reign  with  Christ  a  thousand 
years  (chap,  xx,  4-6),  show  that  Christ's  faithful  martyrs,  whose 
blood  was  the  seed  of  the  Church,  are  associated  with  him  in  the 
authority  and  administration  of  his  Messianic  rule.  The  dragon  is 
the  old  serpent,  the  devil,  and  his  standing  ready  to  devour  the 
child  as  soon  as  born  is  an  image  appropriated  from  Pharaoh's  atti- 
tude toward  the  infant  Israelites  (Exod.  i,  16).  Michael  and  his 
angels  are  but  symbolic  names  of  Christ  and  his  apostles.  The  war 
in  heaven  was  fought  in  the  same  element  where  the  woman  ap- 
peared, and  the  casting  out  of  demons  by  Christ  and  his  apostles 


476  PRINCIPLES   OF 

was  the  reality  to  which  these  symbols  point  (comp.  Luke  x,  18; 
John  xii,  31).  The  soul-conflicts  of  the  Christian  are  of  like  char- 
acter.^ The  flight  of  the  woman  into  the  wilderness  was  the  scat- 
tering of  the  Church  by  reason  of  bitter  persecutions  (comp.  Acts 
viii,  1),  but  especially  that  flight  of  the  church  in  Judea  which 
Jesus  authorized  Avhen  his  disciples  should  see  the  signs  of  the  end 
(Matt,  xxiv,  16  ;  Luke  xxi,  21). 

Being  cast  down  from  the  heavenly  places,  the  dragon  stood  upon 

_  ,        the  sand  of  the  sea,  and  next  revealed  himself  in  a  wild 

TheBeastsfrom  ,  .   ,     . 

the  sea  and  from  bcast,  which  IS  seen  commg  up  out  of  the  sea  (xiii,  1). 

the  land.  jj^  combines  various  features  of  a  leopard,  a  bear,  and 

a  lion,  the  first  three  beasts  of  Daniel's  vision  (Dan.  vii,  4,  6),  and 
the  power  which  the  dragon  gives  him  imjjarts  to  him  all  the 
malignity,  blasphemy,  and  persecuting  violence  which  characterized 
Daniel's  fourth  beast  at  the  appearance  of  the  little  horn.  This 
beast  Ave  understand  to  be  the  Roman  Empire,  especially  as  repre- 
sented in  Nero,  under  whom  the  Jewish  war  began,  and  by  whom 
the  woman's  seed,  the  saints  (comp.  xii,  17,  and  xiii,  7),  Avere  most 
bitterly  persecuted.  He  Avas  the  veriest  incarnation  of  Avickedness, 
a  signal  revelation  of  antichrist,  and  corresponds  in  every  essential 
feature  Avith  the  man  of  sin,  the  son  of  perdition,  of  Avhom  Paul 
Avrote  to  the  Thessalonians  (2  Thess.  ii,  3-10).*  At  the  same  time 
another  beast  is  seen  coming  up  out  of  the  land  (xiii,  11),  having 
two  horns  like  a  lamb.  But  he  is  only  the  satellite,  the  alter  ego 
and  representative  of  the  first  beast,  and  exercises  his  authority. 
This  second  beast  is  a  proper  symbol  of  the  Roman  gOA^ernment  of 
Judea  by  procurators,  and  if  A\^e  seek  for  the  meaning  of  the  tAvo 
horns,  Ave  may  find  it  in  the  two  procurators  specially  noted  for  their 
tyranny  and  oppression,  Albinus  and  Gessius  Florus.^  It  is  a  Avell- 
knoAvn  fact  that  the  Christians  of  this  period  Avere  required  to  Avor- 
ship  the  image  of  the  emperor  or  die,  and  the  procurators  M'ere  the 
emperors  agents  to  enforce  this  measure.^     Thus  the  second  beast 

'  Paul  fully  recognized  the  spiritual  and  demoniacal  character  of  the  Christian's 
struggle  when  he  wrote :  "  Our  wrestling  is  not  against  blood  and  flesh,  but  against 
the  principalities,  against  the  powers,  against  the  world-rulers  of  this  darkness,  against 
the  spiritual  hosts  of  wickedness  in  the  heavenly  places"  (Eph.  vi,  12).  Such  conflict 
was  a  war  in  heaven. 

-  See  above,  pp.  4G0-462. 

^  See  Josephus,  Ant.,  book  xx,  chap,  ix,  1,  and  chap,  xi,  1.  Wars,  book  ii,  chaps, 
xiv  anil  xv. 

■*  Alford,  after  quoting  in  evidence  from  Pliny's  letter  to  Trajan,  observes:  "If  it 
be  said,  as  an  objection  to  this,  that  it  is  not  an  image  of  the  emperor,  but  of  the  beast 
itself,  which  is  spoken  of,  the  answer  is  very  simple,  that  as  the  seer  himself  in  chap, 
xvii,  11  does  not  hesitate  to  identify  one  of  the  nevcn  kings  with  the  beast  itself,  so 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  47T 

is  appropriately  called  "the  false  prophet"  (chaps,  xvi,  13;  xix,  20), 
for  his  great  work  was  to  turn  men  to  a  blasphemous  idolatry.  The 
mystic  number  of  the  beast  (xiii,  18)  would  then  be  represented 
both  by  the  Greek  Aaretvoc;,  and  the  Hebrew  iDp  JIIJ,  the  numerical 
value  of  each  beinji:  666.  For  the  beast  was  both  the  Latin  kinef- 
dom,  and  its  representative  and  head,  JSTero  Ccesar. 

The  vision  of  Mount  Zion  in  chap,  xiv  is  a  glorious  contrast  to 
the  preceding  revelations  of  antichrist.  It  presents  the  vision  of  Mount 
heavenly  side  of  this  period  of  persecution  and  trial,  zion. 
and  sets  it  forth  in  seven  exhibitions:  (1)  First  is  seen  the  Lamb  on 
Mount  Zion  (the  heavenly  Zion),  and  with  him  are  the  thousands  of 
his  redeemed  Israel  in  great  glory  (verses  1-5).  These  are  no  other 
than  the  woman's  seed  who  have  been  caught  up  to  the  throne  of 
God  (xii,  5),  but  are  now  seen  from  another  point  of  view.  (2)  Next 
follows  the  vision  of  the  flying  angel  bearing  eternal  good  tidings  to 
every  nation  (verses  6,  7).  This  is  done  in  spite  of  the  dragon  and 
his  agents.  While  the  dragon,  wielding  the  forces  of  empire,  seeks 
to  annihilate  the  Church  of  God,  the  true  children  of  the  heav- 
enly Jerusalem  are  caught  up  to  be  with  Christ  in  glory;  but  the 
Gospel  is  still  preached  in  all  the  world,  accompanied  by  warning 
and  promise.  Thus  the  saints  triumph  "  on  account  of  the  blood  of 
the  Lamb,  and  on  account  of  the  word  of  their  testimony  "  (chap. 
xii,  11).  (3)  Then  an  angel,  as  by  anticijiation,  announces  the  fall 
of  Babylon  the  great  (ver.  8),  and  is  followed  (4)  by  another  who 
warns  men  against  the  worship  of  the  beast  and  his  image  (verses 
9-12).  (5)  Then  a  voice  from  heaven  pronounces  them  blessed 
who  die  in  the  Lord  from  henceforth  (ver.  13);  as  if  from  that 
eventful  epoch  the  dead  in  Christ  should  enter  at  once  into  a  rest 

we  may  fairly  assume  that  the  image  of  the  beast  for  the  time  being  would  be  the 
image  of  the  reigning  emperor." — Greek  Test,  on  Rev.  xiii,  15.  It  is  strange  that 
learned  critics  will  turn,  with  an  air  of  contempt,  away  from  an  explanation  of  the 
"  image  of  the  beast "  so  natural  and  simple  as  that  given  above,  and  find  satisfaction 
in  such  fancies  as  that  this  image  denotes  the  images  of  saints  set  up  in  papal 
churches  (Faber) ;  or  the  pope  considered  as  the  idol  of  the  Roman  Church  (Newton, 
Daubuz) ;  or  the  temporal  power  of  the  pope,  and  the  patrimony  granted  by  Pepin  in 
A.  D.  754  (Glasgow) ;  or  the  papal  kingdom  or  hierarchy  which  the  priesthood  estab- 
lished (Lord) ;  or  the  empire  of  Charlemagne,  regarded  as  the  image  of  the  old  hea- 
then Roman  Empire  (Mede) ;  or  the  pope's  decretals  (Osiander);  or  the  Inquisition 
(Vitringa) ;  or  the  papal  General  Councils  of  Western  Europe  (Elliott).  Writers  so 
full  of  visions  of  modern  Europe  and  the  fortunes  of  the  papacy  that  they  quickly 
discern  apocalyptic  epochs  in  such  events  as  the  battle  of  Sadowa,  July  S,  1866,  the 
pope's  bull  of  July,  1868,  the  insurrection  in  Spain  under  Prim,  and  the  revolution  in 
France  consequent  upon  the  battle  of  Sedan,  1870,  can  scarcely  be  expected  to  view 
any  prophecy  from  the  historical  standpoint  of  the  sacred  writer.  Comp.  Elliott, 
Horae  Apocalypticse,  5th  ed.,  Lond.,  1872;  Preface  and  Postscript. 


478  PRINCIPLES    OF 

wliich  the  dead  of  tlie  previous  ason  could  not  know.  (6)  The  sixth 
scene  is  that  of  the  Son  of  man  represented  as  wearing  a  golden 
crown,  holding  a  sharp  sickle  in  his  hand,  and  attended  by  an  angel 
(verses  14-16);  and  with  these  soon  appears  another  angel  Imviiig  a 
sharp  sickle,  and  the  land  was  reaped,  and  the  winepress,  trodden 
without  the  city,  spread  rivers  of  blood  that  seemed  to  deluge  all 
the  land.  This  is  but  another  picture  of  the  same  great  catastrophe, 
seen  from  another  point  of  view. 

The  vision  of  the  seven  vials  {(tiidXag,  bov)ls)  full  of  the  wrath  of 
The  seven  last  Ood,  which  are  also  called  the  seven  last  plagues  (chap- 
piagues.  iQY&  XV,  xvi),  is  but  another  symbolization  of  the  seven 

trumpet-woes  (of  chapters  viii-xi),  with  which  they  minutely  corre- 
spond. The  dui)licate  vision  of  these  terrible  judgments  (one  judg- 
ment of  sevenfold  fury,  comp.  Dan.  iii,  19)  is  analogous  to  other  repe- 
titions of  the  same  subject  under  different  imageiy  (see  above,  pp. 
409-411,  and  416,  417).  This  double  vision  of  wrath,  like  the  double 
dream  of  Pharaoh,  served  to  show  that  these  things  were  estab- 
lished by  the  Almighty,  and  that  he  would  shortly  bring  them  to 
pass  (Gen.  xl,  32).' 

The  vision  of  Babylon  the  great  (chapters  xvii,  xviii)  is  a  highly 
wrought  apocalyptic  picture  of  the  apostate  Church  of 
mystic  Baby-  the  old  covenant  (comp.  above,  p.  391).  The  then  exist- 
'""■  ing  Jerusalem,  in  bondage  with  her  children  (Gal.  iv,  25), 

is  portrayed  as  a  harlot,  and  the  language  and  imagery  are  approj)ri- 
ated  largely  from  Ezekiel's  allegory  of  the  same  city  (Ezek.  xvi; 
comp.  Ezek.  xxiv)."  It  is  that  murderess  of  prophets  against  whom 
Jesus  uttered  the  terrible  words  of  Matt,  xxiii,  34-36.  From  tlie 
beginning  of  the  Roman  Empire  Jerusalem  sought  and  maintained 
a  heathenish  complicity  with  the  Caesars,  and  the  empire  became, 
politically,  her  dependence  and  support.  There  was  constant  strife 
among  ambitious  rulers  to  obtain  the  so-called  "  kingdom  of  Judea." 
Jerusalem  was  the  chief  city  of  that  province,  and  is,  therefore, 
l)roperly  said  to  "reign  over  the  kings  (not  of  the  earth,  and  not 
over  emperors  and  nionarc/is  of  the  ^oorld),  but  of  the  land  "  (chap. 

'  "The  repetition  of  the  viriion  of  judgment  in  various  forms,"  says  Farrar,  "is  one 
of  the  reeognized  Hebrew  methods  of  expressing  their  eertainty.  The  same  general 
c-ahimities  are  indicated  by  diverse  symbols."  He  cites  from  the  ancient  Coninientury 
of  Victorinus  the  statement  that  the  seven  vials  are  but  another  symbol  of  the  same 
judgments  as  those  denoted  by  the  trumpets,  and  adds:  "There  is  fair  reason  to  sup- 
pose that  Victorinus  derived  this  .valuable  iuid  by  no  means  obvious  principle  of  in- 
terpretation from  early,  and  perhaps  from  apostolic,  tradition." — The  Early  Days  of 
Christianity,  chap,  xxviii,  p.  450.     London,  1882. 

-  Comp.  Isa.  i,  21  :  "  How  has  the  once  faithful  city  become  a  harlot! "  Comp.  also 
Jcr.  ii,  2,  20;  iii,  ^J-G  ;  iv,  oU ;   xiii,  27. 


BIBLICAL    IIERMEXEUTICS.  479 

xvii,  18).  It  is  the  same  land  (yrj),  the  tribes  of  which  mourn  over 
the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  (chap,  i,  Y).'  We,  accordingly,  take 
the  mystic  Babylon  to  be  identical  M^ith  the  great  city  which,  in 
cliaji.  xi,  8,  is  called  Sodom  and  Egypt,  where  the  Lord  was  ci'uci- 
fied.^ 

The  explanation  of  the  mystery  of  the  woman  and  the  beast, 
ffiven  in  chap,  xvii,  7-18,  has  puzzled  all  interpreters.    ,, 

&_  ,  ^  '  /  ^  _  ^  Mysteryof 

It  is  noticeably  a  composite  explanation,  and  avowedly  woman  and 
applies  partly  to  the  woman  and  partly  to  the  beast  ^^ ' 
Avhich  carries  "her.  The  mystery  requires  for  its  solution  "  the 
mind  which  hath  Avisdom"  (ver.  9),  and  it  may  have  had  a  meaning 
and  force  for  John's  contemporaries  which  we  of  a  long  subsequent 
age  cannot  so  easily  feel.  "  The  beast  which  was,  and  is  not,  and  is 
about  to  come  up  out  of  the  abyss,  and  to  go  away  into  destruc- 
tion "  (ver.  8),  is  an  expression  of  cautious  reserve,  which  is  notably 
like  Paul's  guarded  language  about  the  man  of  sin  (2  Tliess.  ii,  5-7). 
The  beast  with  seven  heads  and  ten  horns  is  usually  identified  Avitli 
the  wild  beast  from  the  sea  (chap,  xiii,  1 ),  and  may  be  understood 
of  Rome  and  her  allied  and  tributary  princes  Avho  took  part  in  the 
war  against  Judea  and  Jerusalem.     The  great  harlot  city,  whose 

'  "  The  kings  of  the  laud,"  who,  in  Psa.  ii,  2,  set  themselves  against  Jehovah  and 
his  Christ,  are  declared  by  the  Apostle  Peter  to  be  such  kings  as  Herod  and  Pontius 
Pilate  fActs  iv,  27).  These,  he  declares,  "were  gathered  together  with  Gentiles  and 
peoples  of  Israel."  Josephus  says :  "  The  city  of  Jerusalem  is  situated  in  the  very 
middle  (of  the  land),  on  which  account  some  have  called  that  city  the  navel  of  the 
country.  Nor  indeed  is  Judea  destitute  of  such  delights  as  come  by  the  sea,  since  its 
maritime  places  extend  as  far  as  Ptolemais.  It  was  parted  into  eleven  portions,  of 
which  the  royal  city  Jerusalem  was  supreme,  and  presided  over  all  the  neighbouring 
country  as  the  head  does  over  the  body." — Wars  of  the  Jews,  book  iii,  iii,  5. 

^  It  deserves  notice  that  there  is  a  title  which,  in  the  Apocalypse,  is  applied  to 
one  particular  city  par  excellence.  It  is  the  title  "  that  great  city  "  [r/  noAig  t/  fieyiilT]']. 
It  is  clear  that  it  is  always  the  same  city  which  is  so  designated,  unless  another  be 
expressly  specified.  Now,  the  city  in  which  the  witnesses  are  slain  is  exjjressly  called 
by  this  title,  "  that  great  city ;  "  and  the  names  Sodom  and  Egypt  are  applied  to  it ;  and 
it  is  furthermore  particularly  identified  as  the  city  "  where  also  our  Lord  was  crucified  " 
(chap,  xi,  8).  There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  this  refers  to  ancient  Jerusa- 
lem. If,  then,  "  the  great  city "  of  chap,  xi,  8,  means  ancient  Jerusalem,  it  follows 
that  "the  great  city  "  of  chap,  xiv,  8,  styled  also  Babylon,  and  "  the  great  city  "  of  chap, 
xvi,  19,  must  equally  signify  Jerusalem.  By  parity  of  reasoning,  "that  great  city" 
[?/  TToAtf  7/  jUfydZ??]  in  chap,  xvii,  18,  and  elsewhere,  must  refer  also  to  Jerusalem.  It 
is  a  mere  assumption  to  say,  as  Dean  Alford  does,  that  Jerusalem  is  never  called  by 
this  name.  There  is  no  unfitness,  but  the  contrary,  in  such  a  distinctive  title  being 
applied  to  Jerusalem.  It  was  to  an  Israelite  the  royal  city,  by  far  the  greatest  in  the 
land,  the  only  city  which  could  properly  be  so  designated ;  and  it  ought  never  to  be 
forgotten  that  the  visions  of  the  Apocalypse  are  to  be  regarded  from  a  Jewish  point 
of  view. — The  Parousia,  pp.  486,  487.  • 


480  PRINCIPLES   OF 

liuly  temple  had  been  made  a  place  of  merchandise  and  a  den  of 
thieves  (Matt,  xxi,  13;  John  ii,  15),  was  carried  for  a  hundred  years 
by  Rome,  and  at  last  hated  and  destroyed  by  the  very  kings  with 
whom  she  had  maintained  her  heathenish  traffic.  Jerusalem's  rela- 
tion to  Rome  and  her  tributary  princes  was  well  voiced  in  that 
Jewish  appeal  to  Pilate:  "If  thou  release  this  man,  thou  art  not 
Csesar's  friend.  .  .  .  We  have  no  king  but  Caesar"  (John  xix, 
12,  15). 

But  while  the  relations  of  Jerusalem  and  Rome  are  thus  outlined, 
The  beast  from  the  beast  "which  was,  and  is  not,  and  shall  come" 
the  abyss.  (rrdQearat,  shall  be  present,  ver.   8),   may   symbolize   a 

deeper  mystery.  He  is  not  a  combination  of  the  lion,  the  leopard, 
and  the  bear,  nor  does  he  "come  up  out  of  the  sea"  like  the  beast 
of  chap,  xiii,  1,  but  he  is  a  "  scarlet-coloured  beast,"  and  "  comes  up 
out  of  the  abyss."  May  he  not,  therefore,  be  more  properly  re- 
garded as  a  special  manifestation  of  the  "  great  red  dragon "  of 
chap,  xii,  3  ?  The  seven  heads  and  ten  horns  of  the  dragon  indi- 
cate seats  of  power  and  regal  and  princely  agents  through  whom 
the  kingly  "angel  of  the  abyss"  (chap,  ix,  11)  accomplishes  his 
Satanic  purposes.  A^^e  need  not,  therefoi'e,  look  to  the  seven  hills 
of  Rome,'  or  to  ten  particular  kings,  for  the  solution  of  the  mystery 
of  the  scarlet-coloured  beast.  The  language  of  the  angel  interpret- 
er, even  when  ostensibly  explaining  tlie  mystery,  is  manifestly 
enigmatical.  Just  as  when,  in  chap,  xiii,  18,  he  that  has  under- 
standing is  called  upon  to  "  count  the  number  of  the  beast,"  so  here 
the  clue  to  the  mystery  of  the  seven  heads  and  ten  horns  is  itself  a 
riddle.  "The  seven  heads  are  seven  mountains  on  Avhich  the 
woman  is  sitting"  (ver.  9).  This  may  indeed  refer  literally  to 
seven  mountains,  either  of  Jerusalem  or  Rome,  for  both  these 
cities  covered  seven  heights;  but  it  is  as  likely  to  refer,  enigmati- 
cally, to  manifold  political  supports  or  alliances,  considered  as  so 
many  seats  of  power  or  consolidated  kingdoms,  and  called  seven 
because  of  covenanted  arrangements.''      The  words  which  follow 

'  The  seven  mountains  on  whicli  the  woman  sitteth  (ver.  9)  may  be  the  mountains 
of  Jerusalem  as  well  as  the  seven  hills  of  Rome.  There  were  Zion,  Moriah,  Acra,  and 
Bezetha,  ami  the  three  fortified  heights,  Millo,  Ophcl,  and  the  rock,  seventy-five  feet 
hi!;li,  on  which  the  Castle  of  Antonia  was  built.  See  Edersheim,  The  Temple,  pp. 
11,  l.'J.  Boston,  1881  Tlie  notion  that  the  neptan  colics  of  Latin  writers  were  famil- 
iar to  .John  and  his  Greek  and  Hebrew  readers,  an<l,  necessarily  to  be  understood 
here,  is  as  fanciful  as  that  the  eagles  of  Matt,  xxiv,  28,  are  the  Roman  eagles.  The 
niinibor  seven,  in  this  allusion  to  the  mountains,  need  not  be  pressed  into  fuller  sig- 
nificance than  the  seven  horns  and  seven  eyes  of  the  Lamb  in  chap,  v,  6,  where  no 
one  insists  on  a  literiil  significance  of  the  number  seven. 

•  "  Tlie    mountains,"    says    Glasgcfw,    "  are,    like    other    terms,    to   be    understood 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  481 

:shoiild  be  rendered:  "And  seven  kings  there  are,"  not  necessarily, 
as  commonly  translated,  '■'■they  are  seven  kings,"  that  is,  the  moun- 
tains represent  seven  kings.  We  are  not  satisfied  with  any  solu- 
tion of  the  riddle  of  these  seven  kings  which  we  have  yet  seen,  and 
will  not  presume  to  add  another  to  the  legion  of  guesses  which 
have  been  put  forth.'  But  we  venture  to  suggest  that  the  beast 
"  which  was,  and  is  not,  and  shall  come,"  may  be  understood  pri- 
mainly  of  Satan  himself,  under  his  different  and  successive  manifes- 
tations, in  the  persons  of  bitter  persecutors  of  the  Church.  It  was 
the  beast  from  the  abyss  by  whom  the  two  witnesses  were  slain 
(chap,  xi,  7;  comp.  chap,  xx,  7).  Cast  out  by  the  death  of  one  im- 
perial persecutor  he  goes  into  the  abyss  (comp.  Luke  viii,  31),  and, 
anon,  comes  up  again  out  of  the  abyss,  and  appropriates  the  blas- 
phemy and  forces  and  diadems  of  the  empii'e  to  make  war  upon  the 
Lamb  and  his  faithful  followers.  As  the  Elijah,  who  was  to  come 
before  the  great  and  notable  day  of  Jehovah  (Mai.  iv,  5),  appeared 
in  the  person  of  John  the  Baptist  (Matt,  xi,  14),  and  was  so  called 
because  he  represented  the  spirit  and  power  of  Elijah  (Luke  i,  IV), 
so  the  beast  "  which  was,  and  is  not,  is  himself  also  an  eighth,^  and 

symbolically.  If  the  woman  is  not  literal,  why  should  the  mountains  be  so  thought  ? 
And  to  call  the  woman  a  literal  city,  built  on  seven  hills,  is  equally  gratuitous,  whether 
a  Protestant  says  it  of  Rome  or  a  Romanist  of  Constantinople." — The  Apocalypse 
Translated  and  Expounded,  p.  439. 

^  The  explanations  of  the  seven  kings  may  be  divided  into  three  classes:  I.  Those 
which  regard  them  as  so  many  different  historical  phases  of  world-power,  as  (1)  Egypt, 
(2)  Assyria,  (3)  Babylon,  (4)  Persia,  (5)  Greece,  (6)  Rome,  (7)  Germanic-Sclavonic  Em- 
pire (Auberlen) ;  or  (1)  Babylonian,  (2)  Medo-Persian,  (3)  Greek,  (4)  Syrian,  (5)  Egyp- 
tian, (6)  Roman,  (Y)  German  Empire  (Wordsworth).  II.  Those  which  make  them 
represent  so  many  different  classes  of  rulers,  as  (1)  kings,  (2)  consuls,  (3)  decemvirs, 
(4)  military  tribunes,  (5)  dictators,  (6)  emperors,  (7)  popes  (Vitringa) ;  or  (1)  kings, 

(2)  consuls,  (3)  dictators,  (4)  decemvirs,  (5)  military  tribunes,  (6)  the  wreath-crowned 
(ark^avo^)  emperors,  (7)  the  diadem  (diddiifia)  emperors  (Elliott).  III.  Those  which 
understand  seven  individual  kings,  as  the  first  seven  Caesars,  (1)  Julius,  (2)  Augustus, 

(3)  Tiberius,  (4)  Caligula,  (5)  Claudius,  (6)  Nero,  (7)  Galba  (Stuart).  Others  begin  the 
seven  with  Augustus ;  Grotius  begins  with  Claudius ;  Diisterdieck  tlirows  out  of  the 
number  the  three  usurpers,  Galba,  Otho,  and  Vitellius,  and  makes  the  seventh  head 
Vespasian.  Ziillig  understands  the  seven  kings  to  be  (1)  Herod  the  Great,  (2)  Arche- 
laus,  (3)  Philip,  (4)  Antipas,  (5)  Agrippa,  (6)  Herod  of  Chalcis,  (7)  Agrippa  II.,  con- 
sidered as  antitypes  of  the  seven  Edomite  kings  mentioned  in  Gen.  xxxvi,  33-38. 
The  author  of  The  Parousia  (Lond.,  1878)  identifies  them  with  the  seven  procurators 
of  Judea,  (1)  Cuspius  Fadus,  (2)  Tiberius  Alexander,  (3)  Ventidius  Cumanus,  (4)  Anto- 
nius  Felix,  (5)  Porcius  Festus,  (6)  Albinus,  (7)  Gessius  Florus.  The  above  by  no 
means  exhausts  the  various  explanations.  Surely  he  who  would  presume  to  deter- 
mine an  important  question  of  apocalyptic  interpretation  upon  any  theory  of  the  seven 
kings  builds  upon  a  very  uncertain  foundation. 

^  According  to  Gebhardt  "  the   eighth  king   is   identical    with   the  beast  (comp. 
Cowles  on  the  Revelation,  in  loco),  whose  seven  heads  are  seven  kings.     As  individual 
31 


482  PRINCIPLES   OF 

is  of  the  seven  [of  the  same  spirit  and  power],  and  goes  away  into 
destruction"  (ver.  11).  It  is  not  at  all  impossible  that  the  Avide- 
spread  rumour  that  Nero  was  to  appear  again  grew  out  of  a  misap- 
prehension of  this  riddle,  just  as  some  modern  interpreters  still 
insist  (see  Alford  on  Matt,  xi,  14)  that  the  real  Elijah  is  yet  liter- 
ally to  come.  The  early  Chiliasts,  like  their  modern  followers, 
often  insisted  on  the  literal  interpretation  even  of  riddles. 

The  fall  of  Babylon  the  great  is  portrayed  in  glowing  colours  in 

chap,  xviii,  1-xix,  10,  and  tlie  language  and  imagery 

mystic    Baby-  are  appropriated  almost  wholly  from  the  Old  Testa- 

^^^-  ment  prophetic  pictures  of  the  fall  of  ancient  Babylon 

and  Tyre.'     The  vision  is  fourfold:  First  (1)  an  angel  proclaims  the 

forms  of  world-power  appear  to  the  seer  to  culminate  and  unite  in  an  empire  which 
he  calls  the  beast,  so  he  sees  again  the  particular  stages  of  the  development  of  this 
empire,  the  individual  rulers  of  the  same  culminate  in  one  prince,  which  he  also  de- 
scribes as  the  beast.  As  the  leopard,  the  bear,  and  the  lion  are  contained  in  the  beast, 
so  are  the  seven  heads  of  the  beast  contahied  in  the  one  head.  We  may  say  that  as 
he  sees  in  an  individual  king  the  nature  of  a  definite  empire,  uniting  in  itself  all  ear- 
lier empires,  personified,  so  also  he  sees  unfolded  in  this  empire  the  nature  of  that 
individual  king :  this  king  is  to  him  the  empire  in  person ;  this  empire  is  to  him  the 
king  in  the  form  of  a  kingdom.  It  is  also  evidently  much  easier  in  the  one  place  to 
think  of  an  individual  king,  and  in  the  other  of  an  empire,  and  it  is  therefore  ever  ta 
be  maintained  that  the  seer  so  thought ;  the  empire  of  which  this  is  the  king,  the 
king  whose  is  the  empire." — The  Doctrine  of  the  Apocalypse,  English  translation, 
p.  221.     Edinb.,  1878. 

'  How  notably  strange  it  is  that  learned  exegetes,  who  can  see  striking  fulfilments 
of  this  prophecy  in  comparatively  unimportant  events  of  the  politics  and  feuds  of 
modern  Europe  and  the  papacy,  are  forgetful  of  such  events  as  the  following,  which 
is  only  one  of  many  similar  pictures  of  woe  given  us  by  the  Jewish  historian.  De- 
scribing the  destruction  of  the  temple,  Joscphus  says :  "  While  the  holy  house  was  on 
fire  everything  was  plundered  that  came  to  hand,  and  ten  thousand  of  those  that  were 
caught  were  slain ;  nor  was  there  a  commiseration  of  any  age,  or  any  reverence  of 
gravity ;  but  children  and  old  men,  and  profane  persons  and  priests,  were  all  slain  in 
the  same  manner ;  so  that  this  war  went  round  all  sorts  of  men,  and  brought  them  to 
destruction,  and  as  well  those  that  made  supplication  for  their  lives  as  those  that  de- 
fended themselves  by  fighting.  The  flame  was  also  carried  a  long  way,  and  made  an 
echo  together  witli  the  groans  of  those  that  were  slain ;  and  because  this  hill  was 
high,  and  the  works  at  the  temple  were  very  great,  one  would  have  thought  the  whole 
city  had  been  on  fire.  Nor  can  one  imagine  anything  either  greater  or  more  terrible 
than  this  noise;  for  there  was  at  once  a  shout  of  tlie  Roman  legions,  who  were  march- 
ing all  together,  and  a  sad  clamour  of  the  seditious,  who  were  now  surrounded  with 
fire  and  sword.  The  people  also  that  were  left  above  were  beaten  back  upon  the 
enemy,  and  under  a  great  consternation,  and  made  sad  moans  at  the  calamity  they 
were  under;  the  multitude  also  that  was  in  the  city  joined  in  this  outcry  with  those 
that  were  upon  the  hill ;  and,  besides,  many  of  those  that  were  worn  away  by  the 
famine,  and  their  mouths  almost  closed,  when  they  saw  the  fire  of  the  holy  house, 
they  exerted  their  utmost  strength,  and  brake  out  into  groans  and  outcries  again  : 
Perea  did  also  return  the  echo,  as  well  as  the  mountains  round  about  [the  city],  anl 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  483 

awful  ruin  (xviii,  1-3).  He  repeats  the  words  already  used  in  chap, 
xiv,  8,  but  which  were  used  of  old  by  Isaiah  (xxi,  9)  and  Jeremiah 
(li,  8)  in  foretelling  the  ruin  of  the  Chaldaean  capital.  (2)  Then  an- 
other heavenly  voice  is  heard,  like  the  words  of  Jesus  in  Matt,  xxiv, 
16,  and  like  the  prophetic  word  which  long  before  had  called  the  chos- 
en people  to  "  flee  out  of  the  midst  of  Babylon,  and  deliver  every  man 
his  soul"  (Jer.  li,  6;  corap.  1,  8;  Isa.  xlviii,  20;  Zech.  ii,  6,  7),  and 
this  call  is  followed  by  a  woeful  dirge  over  the  sudden  ruin  of  the 
great  city  (xviii,  4-20).  This  oracle  of  doom  should  be  closely 
compared  with  that  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  over  ancient  Babylon 
(Isa.  xiii,  19-22;  Jer.  1,  li),  and  that  of  Ezekiel  over  the  fall  of 
Tyre  (Ezek.  xxvi-xxviii).  (3)  The  violence  of  the  catastroj^he  is 
next  illustrated  by  the  symbol  of  a  mighty  angel  hurling  a  mill- 
stone into  the  sea,  and  the  consequent  cessation  of  all  her  former 
activity  and  noise  (xviii,  21-24).  (4)  After  these  things  there  is 
heard  a  poean  of  victory  in  the  heavens — notable  contrast  to  the 
voice  of  the  harpers  and  minstrels  of  the  fallen  Babylon,  and  all 
the  servants  of  God  are  admonished  to  prepare  for  the  marriage 
supper  of  the  Lamb. 

After  the  fall  of  the  great  Babylon  there  follows  a  sevenfold 
vision  of  the  coming  and  kingdom  of  the  Christ  (chap.  The  parousia 
xix,  11-xxi,  8).  As,  in  Matt,  xxiv,  29,  "immediately  0^1116^ sonTf 
after  the  tribulation  of  those  days  "  the  sign  of  the  Son  man. 
of  man  appears  in  heaven,  so,  immediately  after  the  horrors  of  the 
woe-smitten  city,  the  seer  of  Patmos  beholds  the  heaven  opened, 
and  the  glorious  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords  comes  forth  to 
judge  the  nations  and  avenge  his  own  elect.  This  great  apocalyp- 
tic picture  contains:  (1)  The  parousia  of  the  Son  of  man  in  his 
glory  (xix,  11-16).  (2)  The  destruction  of  the  beast  and  the  false 
prophet  with  all  their  impious  forces  (verses  17-21).  This  over- 
throw is  portrayed  in  noticeable  harmony  with  that  of  the  lawless 
one  in  2  Thess.  ii,  8,  "  whom  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  take  off  with  the 
breath  of  his  mouth,  and  bring  to  naught  with  the  manifestation  of 
his  coming;"  and  the  beastly  agents  of  Satan,  like  those  of  Daniel's 
visions  (Dan.  vii,  11),  are  given  to  the  burning  flame.  (3)  The  de- 
struction of  these  beasts,  to  whom  the  dragon  gave  his  power  and 

augmented  the  force  of  the  entire  noise.  Yet  was  the  misery  itself  more  terrible 
than  tliis  disorder ;  for  one  would  have  thought  that  the  hill  itself,  on  which  the  tem- 
ple stood,  was  seetliiug  hot,  as  full  of  fire  on  every  part  of  it,  that  the  blood  was 
larger  in  quantity  than  the  fire,  and  those  that  were  slain  more  in  number  than  thqse 
that  slew  them  ;  for  the  ground  did  nowhere  appear  visible  for  the  dead  bodies  that 
lay  on  it ;  but  the  soldiers  went  over  heaps  of  these  bodies  as  they  ran  upon  such  as 
fled  from  them." — Wars  of  the  Jews,  book  vi,  chap,  v,  1. 


484  PRINCIPLES   OP 

authority  (chap,  xiii,  2,  11,  12),  is  appropriately  followed  by  the 
binding  and  imprisonment  of  the  old  dragon  himself  (chap,  xx,  1-3). 
The  symbols  employed  to  set  forth  all  these  triumphs  are  surely 
not  to  be  understood  literally  of  a  warfare  carried  on  with  carnal 
weapons  (comp.  2  Cor.  x,  4;  Eph.  vi,  11-lV),  but  they  vividly  ex- 
press momentous  facts  forever  to  be  associated  with  the  consumma- 
tion of  that  age,  and  crisis  of  ages,  when  Judaism  fell,  and  Chris- 
tianity opened  upon  the  world.  From  that  period  onward  no 
well-authenticated  instance  of  demoniacal  possession  can  be  shown.' 

With  that  shutting  up  of  Satan  the  millennium  begins, 
The  Millennium.         ,  'if?-.  •    j  ^i  i     i-      i  i 

a  long  indefinite   period,  as  the   symbolical   number 

most  naturally  suggests  (see  above,  p.  390),  but  a  period  of  ample 
fulness  for  the  universal  diffusion  and  triumph  of  the  Gospel 
(verses  4-6).  "The  first  resurrection"  takes  place  at  the  begin- 
ning of  this  period,  and  is  chiefly  conspicuous  as  a  resurrection  of 
martyrs;  a  bliss  of  which  not  all  the  dead  appear  to  have  been 
"accounted  worthy"  (/caraftwi^svref,  Luke  xx,  35),  but  Avhicli  Paul 
was  anxious  to  attain  (Phil,  iii,  11).  For  it  is  written,  "  Blessed  and 
holy  is  he  who  has  a  part  in  the  first  resurrection;  over  these  the 
second  death  has  no  authority,"  for  of  such  Jesus  said,  "  neither  can 
they  die  any  more"  (Luke  xx,  36).  Moreover,  they  sit  upon" 
thrones,  and  judgment  is  given  to  them  (comp.  Dan,  vii,  22;  Matt, 
xix,  28;  Luke  xxii,  28-30;  1  Cor.  vi,  2),  and  they  are  made  "priests 
of  God  and  of  Christ,  and  reign  with  him  the  thousand  years." 
The  language  of  verse  4,  however,  intimates  that  others  besides  the 
martyrs  may  sit  upon  thrones  and  exercise  judgment  with  the 
Christ  (comp.  chap,  ii,  26,  27;  iii,  21). 

Of  other  things  which  may  occur  during  the  millennium  no  men- 
Tfie  chiiiastic  tion  is  here  made,  and  yet  all  manner  of  fancies  have 
Interpretation,  been  built  upon  this  brief  passage  of  the  Apocalypse. 
The  Chiliasts  assume  that  this  millennium  is  to  be  a  visible  reign 
of  Christ  and  his  saints  upon  the  earth,  and  with  this  reign  they 
associate  a  most  literal  conception  of  other  prophecies.  The  follow- 
ing, from  Justin  Martyr,  is  one  of  the  earliest  expressions  of  this 
view:  "I,  and  others,"  he  says,  "who  are  right-minded  Christians 
on  all  points,  are  assured  that  there  will  be  a  resurrection  of  the 

'  "  \Vc  conclude,"  says  the  author  of  The  Parousia,  "  that  at  the  end  of  the  age  a 
marked  and  decisive  check  was  given  to  the  jiower  of  Satan ;  whicii  check  is  symbol- 
ically represented  in  the  Apocalypse  by  the  chaining  and  imprisoning  of  the  dragon 
in  the  abyss.  It  does  not  follow  from  this  that  error  and  evil  were  banished  from  the 
earth.  It  is  enough  to  show  that  this  was,  as  Schlcgel  says,  'the  decisive  crisis  be- 
tween ancient  and  modern  times,'  and  that  the  introduction  of  Christianity  '  has 
changed  and  regenerated,  not  only  government  and  science,  but  the  whole  system  of 
human  life.'" — Parousia,  p.  518. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  485 

dead,  and  a  thousand  years  in  Jerusalem,  which  will  then  be  built, 
adorned,  and  enlarged,  as  the  prophets  Ezekiel  and  Isaiah  and 
others  declare.  .  .  .  And,  further,  there  was  a  certain  man  with 
us  whose  name  was  John,  one  of  the  apostles  of  Christ,  who  proph- 
esied, by  a  revelation  that  was  made  to  him,  that  those  who  believed 
in  our  Christ  would  dwell  a  thousand  years  in  -Terusalem;  and  that 
thereafter  the  general  and,  in  short,  the  eternal  resurrection  and 
judgment  of  all  men  would  likewise  take  place." '  This  Ebionite 
conception,  having  gained  an  early  prominence,  has  infected  apoc- 
alyptic interpretation  with  a  disturbing  leaven  even  until  now,  and 
there  is  little  hoj^e  of  a  better  exegesis  until  all  dogmatic  notions 
are  set  aside  and  we  fearlessly  accept  what  the  Scripture  says,  and 
no  more. 

The  old  Chiliastic  ideas  of  a  restoration  of  all  Israel  at  Jerusalem, 
and  of  Christ  and  his  glorified  saints  literally  sitting  chiiiastic  inter- 
on  thrones  and  reigning  in  visible  material  glory  on  o^u f^'suukient 
the  earth,  are  without  warrant  in  this  Scripture.  Noth-  warrant, 
ing  is  here  said  about  Jerusalem,  or  the  Jews,  or  the  Gentiles.  An 
indefinite  number  sit  upon  thrones  and  receive  judgment.  Among 
them  those  who  had  been  beheaded  for  the  testimony  of  Jesus  have 
a  most  conspicuous  place,  and  thus  they  receive  the  reward  prom- 
ised in  chap,  vi,  9-11.  These  now  live  and  reign  with  Christ,  not 
on  the  earth,  but  where  the  throne  of  his  kingdom  is,  namely,  in 
the  heavens.  This  accords  with  Paul's  words  in  2  Tim.  ii,  11:  "If 
we  died  with  him  (i.  e.,  by  martyrdom;  comp.  Phil,  iii,  10)  we  shall 
also  live  with  him;  if  we  endure  suffering  we  shall  also  reign  with 
him."  A  resurrection  of  martyrs,  to  take  place  at  the  beginning  of 
the  millennial  era,  is  evidently  taught  in  Rev.  xx,  4-6,  and  is  also 
in  harmony  with  the  Pauline  eschatology  as  we  have  already  shown 
(see  above,  p.  463).  "I  do  not  see,"  says  Stuart,  "  how  we  can,  on 
the  ground  of  exegesis,  fairly  avoid  the  conclusion  that  John  ha;^ 
taught  in  the  passage  before  us  that  there  will  be  a  resurrection  of 
the  martyr-saints  at  the  commencement  of  the  period  after  Satan 
shall  have  been  shut  up  in  the  dungeon  of  the  great  abyss." " 

'  Dialogue  with  Trypho,  Ixxx,  Ixxxi.  "  The  Book  of  Revelation,"  says  Hagenbach, 
"in  its  twentieth  chapter,  gave  currency  to  the  idea  of  a  millennial  kingdom,  together 
with  that  of  a  second  resurrection ;  and  the  imagination  of  those  who  dwelt  fondly 
upon  sensuous  impressions  delineated  these  millennial  hopes  in  the  m.ost  glowing 
terms.  This  was  the  case,  not  only  with  the  Judaizing  Ebionites  and  Cerinthus,  but 
also  with  several  orthodox  fathers,  such  as  Papias,  Justin,  Irenaeus,  and  Tertullian." — 
History  of  Doctrines,  Translated  by  Smith,  vol.  i,  p.  213.     New  York,  1861. 

2  Commentary  on  the  Apocalypse,  vol.  ii,  p.  476.  Similarly  Alford  :  "No  legitimate 
treatment  of  this  text  will  extort  from  it  what  is  known  as  the  spiritual  interpretatioL 
now  in  fashion.     If,  in  a  passage  where   two  resurrections  are  mentioned,  where 


486  PRINCIPLES   O'P 

(5)  At  the  end  of  tlie  millennial  period  there  is  to  be  a  loosing  of 
The  last  defeat  Satan,  a  rising  of  hostile  forces,  symbolized  by  Gog  and 
^\  ^i^'*!"'-  'i°*^  Magog  (comp.  Ezek.  xxxviii,  xxxix),  and  a  fearful 
ment.  catastrophe,  resulting  in  the  final  and  everlasting  over- 

throw of  the  devil — the  culmination  of  the  prophecy  of  Gen.  iii,  15. 
This  last  conflict,  belonging  to  a  distant  future,  is  rapidly  passed 
over  by  the  seer,  and  its  details  are  not  made  known  (verses  7-10). 
(0)  The  last  great  judgment  is  next  portrayed  (verses  11-15),  and 
may  well  be  regarded  as  the  culmination  and  completion  of  that 
continual  judgment  (depicted  in  Matt,  xxv,  31-46)  which  began 
M'ith  the  parousia  and  continues  until  the  Son  of  man  delivers  over 
the  kingdom  to  the  Father  (1  Cor.  xv,  24).  (7)  The  last  picture  in 
this  wonderful  apocalyptical  series  is  that  of  the  new  heavens  and 
new  land,  and  the  descent  of  the  heavenly  Jerusalem  (xxi,  1-8).  It 
corresponds  with  Matt,  xxv,  34,  where  the  king  says  to  those  on  his 
right  hand:  "Come,  ye  blessed  of  my  Father,  inherit  the  kingdom 
prepared  for  you  from  the  foundation  of  the  world."  As  there  the 
glory  of  the  righteous  is  put  in  striking  contrast  with  the  curse 
and  doom  of  the  wicked,  and,  it  is  finally  said,  "  These  shall  go 
away  into  eternal  punishment"  (Matt,  xxv,  46),  so  here,  after  the 
glory  of  the  redeemed  is  outlined,  it  is  added,  as  the  issue  of  an 
eternal  judgment:  "But  as  for  the  fearful,  and  unbelieving,  and 
abominable,  and  murderers,  and  fornicators,  and  sorcerers,  and  idol- 
aters, and  all  liars,  their  part  is  in  the  lake  that  burns  with  fire  and 
brimstone  (comp.  '  the  eternal  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his 
angels,'  Matt,  xxv,  41),  which  is  the  second  death." 

It  should  be  noticed  how  this  last  sevenfold  apocalyptic  vision 

certain  souk  lived  at  the  first,  and  the  rest  of  the  dead  lived  only  at  the  end  of  a  speci- 
fied period  after  the  first — if  in  such  a  passage  the  first  resurrection  may  be  under- 
stood to  mean  spiritual  rising  witli  Christ,  while  the  second  means  literal  rising  from 
the  grave ;  then  there  is  an  end  of  all  significance  in  language,  and  Scripture  is  wijied 
out  as  a  definite  testimony  to  any  thing." — Greek  Testament,  in  loco.  This  argument 
holds  e(iually  good  against  all  theories  of  the  "first  resurrection,"  which  allow  that 
the  first  is  figurative  and  the  other  literal.  Brown's  nine  famous  arguments  against 
the  literal,  and  in  favour  of  a  figurative  explanation  of  the  first  resurrection  (Christ's 
Second  Coming,  pp.  '2:?l-258.  New  York,  ISGC)),  are  all  aimed  against  the  sensuous 
Cliiliastic  notion  that  it  is  the  simultaneous  resurrection  of  all  the  righteous  dead — a 
view  which  we  repudiate  as  imscriptural.  But  Brown  himself  fairly  overthrows  the 
notion  of  Scott  and  others  that  John  saw  a  resurrection  of  souls,  and  not  of  bodies. 
"  This  is  to  mistake  what  the  apostle  saw  in  the  vision.  lie  did  not  see  a  resurrection 
of  souls.  He  saw  'the  souls  of  them  that  were  slain;'  that  is,  he  had  a  vision  of  the 
martyrs  themselves  in  the  state  of  the  dead — after  they  were  dead,  and  just  before 
their  resurrection.  Then  he  saw  them  rise:  'They  lived' — not  their  souls,  but  them- 
selves. All  figurative  resurrections  in  Scripture  are  couched  in  the  language  of  literal 
ones ;  and  why  should  this  be  any  exception  V  " — Christ's  Second  Coming,  p.  229. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.       •  487 

(chap,  xix,  11-xxi,  8)  covers  the  entire  field  of  biblical  eschatology. 
The  whole  is  rapidly  sketched,  for  details  would  have  rpj^^^g  visions 
transcended  the  purpose  of  "  the  prophecy  of  this  book  "  introduce  wiiat 
(xxii,  10),  which  was  to  make  known  things  which  were  time-iimits  of 
shortly  to  come  to  pass  (chap,  i,  1-3).  But  like  the  last  tiiebook. 
section  of  our  Lord's  discourse  (Matt,  xxv,  31-46),  which  introduces 
things  running  far  beyond  the  time-limits  of  that  prophecy,  but 
which  were  to  commence  "  when  the  Son  of  man  should  come  in 
his  glory;"  so  this  sevenfold  vision  begins  with  the  parousia  (chap, 
xix,  11),  and  sketcl^ps  in  brief  outline  the  mighty  triumphs  and  eter- 
nal issues  of  the  Messiah's  reign.' 

We  understand  that  the  millennium  of  Rev.  xx,  1-6,  is  now  in 
progress.    It  dates  from  the  consummation  of  the  Jew- 

V,  T     •  -i     -I    i>    ■  The  Millennium 

isli  age.  It  IS  a  round  definite  number  used  symboli-  is  the  Gospel 
cally  for  an  indefinite  aon.  It  is  the  period  of  the  ^'''P^^'^^"''- 
Messianic  reign,  and  the  kingdom  of  the  heavens,  like  the  mustard 
seed  and  the  leaven  (Matt,  xiii,  31-33),  is  passing  through  its  grad- 
ual development.  It  may  require  a  million  years.  The  impatient 
Chiliast  will  not  be  satisfied  with  this  slow  Messianic  order,  and  re- 
fuses to  see  that  the  powers  of  darkness  have  been  repressed,  and 
the  progress  of  human  civilization  has  been  more  marked  since  the 
end  of  that  age  than  ever  before.  But  others  see  and  know  that 
since  the  dawn  of  Christianity,  idolatry  has  been  well  nigh  abolished, 
and  every  element  of  righteousness  and  truth  has  been  gaining 
prominence  and  control  in  the  laws  of  nations.^     It  is  not  in  accord 

*  Lange  suggestively  but  somewhat  fancifully  observes :  "  The  entire  aeon  is  to  be 
conceived  of  as  an  aeon  of  separations  and  eliminations  in  an  ethical  and  a  cosmical 
sense,  separations  and  eliminations  such  as  are  necessary  to  make  manifest  and  to 
complete  the  ideal  regulations  of  life.  Of  judgments  of  damnation  between  the  judg- 
ment upon  Antichrist  and  the  judgment  upon  Satan  there  can  be  no  question;  the 
reference  can  be  only  to  a  critical  government  and  management  preparatory  to  the 
final  consummation.  The  whole  JBon  is  a  crisis  which  occasions  the  visible  appear- 
ance of  the  heaven  on  earth.  The  whole  aeon  is  the  great  last  day.  We  may  even 
conceive  of  the  mutiny  which  finally  breaks  out  as  a  result  of  these  preparations,  for 
a  sort  of  protest  on  the  part  of  the  wicked  was  hinted  at  by  Christ  in  his  escliatolog- 
ical  discourse  (Matt,  xxv,  44),  and  the  most  essential  element  in  the  curse  of  hell  is 
the  continuance  of  revolt,  the  gnashing  of  teeth." — Commentary  on  the  Revelation  of 
John,  p.  350.     American  edition.     New  York,  1874. 

'^  Pope  represents  the  Catholic  faith  and  interpretation  as  "  content  to  understand 
figuratively  the  glowing  representations  of  the  ancient  prophecies  as  applying  to  the 
present  Christian  Church.  It  takes  the  Apocalypse  as  a  book  of  symbols,  which  does 
not  give  consecutive  history,  but  continually  reverts  to  the  beginning,  and  exhibits  in 
varying  visions  the  same  one  great  final  truth.  Satan  was  bound  or  cast  out  when 
our  Saviour  ascended ;  he  has  never  since  been  the  god  and  seducer  of  the  nations  as 
he  was  before,  and  as  he  will  for  a  season  be  permitted  to  be  again.     The  saints, 


488  PRINCIPLES   OP 

■with  either  history  or  prophecy  to  believe  that  the  Gospel  of  the 

kinofdom  of  Christ  will  have  for  its  historical  period  an  teon  shorter 

than  that  required  for  its  preparation  in  the  typical  dispensations 

which  preceded  it.     It  is  not  probable  that  God  would  take  four 

thousand  years  of  type  and  shadow  to  prepare  the  world  for  two 

thousand  years  of  light.     We  should  not  expect  the  earlier  part  of 

the  Messianic  millennium  to  be  without  any  darkness,  and  there  is- 

nothing  in  the  Scriptures  to  warrant  the  idea  that  it  is  to  be  a  period 

of  uniform  and  unclouded  blessedness  and  glory. 

There  remains  for  our  notice  but  one  more  great  apocalyptic 

picture,  the  vision  of  the  New  Jerusalem.     As  in  chap. 
The  vision   of    ^ 
the  New  Jem-  xvi,  19,  Under  the  seventh  and  last  plague,  the  fall  of 

^^^^'  the  great  Babylon  (old  Jerusalem)  was  briefly  outlined, 

and  then,  in  chap,  xvii-xix,  10,  another  and  more  detailed  portrai- 
ture of  that  "  mother  of  the  harlots  and  of  the  abominations  of  the 
land"  was  added,  going  over  many  of  the  same  things  again,  so 
here,  having  given  under  the  last  series  of  visions  a  short  but  vivid 
picture  of  the  heavenly  Jerusalem  (xxi,  1-8),  the  apocalyptist,  follow- 
ing his  artistic  style  and  habit  of  repetition,  tells  how  one  of  the 
same  seven  angels  (comp.  xvii,  1-4, and  xxi,  9-11)  took  him  to  a  lofty 
mountain,  and  gave  him  a  fuller  vision  of  the  Bride,  the  wife  of  the 
Lamb.  This  wife  of  the  Lamb  is  no  other  than  the  woman  of  chap, 
xii,  1,  but  she  is  here  revealed  at  a  later  stage  of  her  history,  after 
the  dragon  has  been  shut  up  in  the  abyss.  After  the  land  has  been 
cleared  of  dragon,  beast,  and  false  prophet,  the  seed  of  the  woman 
who  fled  into  the  wilderness,  the  seed  caught  up  to  the  throne  of 
God,  are  conceived  as  "coming  down  out  of  heaven  from  God," 
and  all  things  are  made  new.  The  language  and  symbols  used  are 
appropriated  mainly  from  Isaiah  Ixv,  iV-lvi,  24,  and  the  closing 
chapters  of  Ezekiel.  The  great  thought  is :  Babylon,  the  bloody 
harlot,  has  fallen,  and  New  Jerusalem,  the  glorious  Bride,  appears. 
As  the  closing  chapters  of  Ezekiel  have  been  variously  under- 
Meaning  of  the  stood  (see  above,  pp.  436,  437),  so  this  vision  of  the 
New  Jerusalem.  New  Jerusalem,  which  is  evidently  modelled  after  the 
pattern  of  that  older  Apocalypse,  has  been  explained  in  different 

martyrs,  and  others — the  martyrs  pre-emincnth' — now  rule  with  Christ :  and  hath  made 
as  a  kingdom  (Rev.  i,  6),  they  themselves  sing ;  and  they  reign  upon  earth  (Rev.  v,  10). 
The  apostles,  and  all  saints,  have  part  in  the  first  resurrection,  and  in  the  present 
regeneration  reign  with  Jesus,  thougl;  the  future  regeneration  shall  be  yet  more  abun- 
dant. The  unanimous  strain  of  prophecy  concerning  the  glory  of  the  Messiah's  king- 
dom is  to  be  interpreted  as  partly  fulfilled  in  the  spiritual  reign  of  Christ  in  this 
world,  which  is  not  yet  fully  manifested  as  it  will  be ;  and  partly  as  the  earthly  figure- 
of  a  heavenly  reality  hereafter." — Compendium  of  Christian  Theology,  vol.  iii,  pp.- 
400,  401.    N.  Y.,  1881. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  48» 

•ways.  (1)  According  to  one  class  of  interpreters,  the  future  resto- 
ration of  the  Jews  to  Palestine,  and  the  rebuilding  of  Jerusalem  on 
a  magnificent  scale,  are  here  predicted.'  (2)  According  to  others, 
the  new  heaven,  new  land,  and  new  Jerusalem  are  but  a  symbolic 
recapitulation  of  the  visions  of  chajD.  xx,  for  the  purpose  of  fuller 
detail,  and  are  to  be  understood  as  synchronizing  with  the  period 
of  the  thousand  years.  (3)  But  most  interpreters  regard  the  proph- 
ecy as  post-millennial,  and  descriptive  of  the  final  heavenly  state 
of  the  glorified  saints  of  God.  Rejecting  the  first  of  the  above 
named  views  (which  represents  the  sensuous  Ebionite  conception  of 
the  kingdom -of  heaven,  and  magnifies  the  letter  to  the  quenching 
of  the  spirit  of  Scripture),  we  may  blend  the  two  other  interpreta- 
tions. Ezekiel's  vision,  as  we  have  seen  (p.  43V),  symbolized  the 
New  Testament  Church  and  kingdom  of  God ;  why  should  not  the 
same  conception  enter  into  this  parallel  prophecy?  But  as  later 
revelations  are  wont  to  embody  fuller  and  more  perfect  outlines  of 
the  provisions  of  grace,  so  John's  picture  of  new  heaven,  new  land, 
and  new  city  is  more  luminous  and  far  reaching  in  its  indications 
of  what  God  has  prepared  for  those  who  love  him  and  keep  his 
commandments. 

The  words  of  Haggai  ii,  6,  Vjare  acknowledged  by  the  best  inter- 
preters to  be  a  Messianic  prophecy:  "Yet  once — it  is  Hag. ii, o, 7, and 
a  little  while — and  I  will  shake  the  heavens,  and  the  ^eb.  xii,  sg-ss. 
land,  and  the  sea,  and  the  desert ;  and  I  will  shake  all  the  nations, 
and  they  shall  come  to  the  delight''  of  all  the  nations,  and  I  will 

'  Here  properly  belongs  that  exposition  of  the  "new  heaven  and  new  earth,"  which, 
finds  in  Isa.  Ii,  16;  Ixv,  17;  Ixvi,  22;  2  Pet.  iii,  10-13;  Rev.  xx,  11 ;  xxi,  1,  a  literal 
prophecy  of  the  destruction  of  the  world  by  fire,  and  the  creation  of  a  new  world  in. 
its  place.  The  only  question  among  these  interpreters  is  whether  an  absolutely  new 
creation  is  intended,  or  only  a  renovation  {Tra^AyyEveala,  regeneration  (Matt,  xix,  28) 
of  the  materials  of  the  old.  That  these  texts  may  intimate  or  dimly  foreshadow  some 
such  ultimate  reconstruction  of  the  physical  creation,  need  not  be  denied,  for  we  know 
not  the  possibilities  of  the  future,  nor  the  purposes  of  God  respecting  all  things  which 
he  has  created.  But  the  contexts  of  these  several  passages  do  not  authorize  such  a. 
doctrine.  Isa.  Ii,  16,  refers  to  the  resuscitation  of  Zion  and  Jerusalem,  and  is  clearly 
metaphorical.  The  same  is  true  of  Isa.  Ixv,  17,  and  Ixvi,  22,  for  the  context  in  all 
these  places  confines  the  reference  to  Jerusalem  and  the  people  of  God,  and  sets  forth 
the  same  great  prophetic  conception  of  the  Messianic  future  as  the  closing  chapters 
of  Ezekiel.  The  language  of  2  Pet.  iii,  10,  12,  is  taken  mainly  from  Isa.  xxx,  4,  and 
is  limited  to  the  parousia,  like  the  language  of  Matt,  xxiv,  29.  Then  the  Lord  made 
"  not  only  the  land  but  also  the  heaven  "  to  tremble  (Heb.  xii,  26),  and  removed  the 
things  that  were  shaken  in  order  to  establish  a  kingdom  which  cannot  be  moved. 
(Heb.  xii,  27,  28). 

*  This  most  simple  construction  of  the  Hebrew  has  been  strangely  ignored  by  a 
supposed  necessity  of  making  rnOPI,  delight,  or  desire,  the  subject  of  the  verb  !iN3, 


490  PRINCIPLES   OF 

fill  this  house  with  glory."  This  prophecy  is  quoted  and  explained, 
in  Heb.  xii,  26-28,  as  the  removal  of  an  earth  and  heaven  which  shall 
give  place  to  an  "  immovable  kingdom."  Is  there  any  reason  for  be- 
lievinsr  this  immovable  kingdom  to  be  other  than  that  of  Avhich  the 
Lord  spoke  in  Matt,  xvi,  28:  "There  are  some  standing  here  who 
shall  not  taste  of  death,  till  they  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in  his 
kingdom"?  The  greatest  "glory  of  that  latter  house,"  of  which 
Haggai  (ii,  7,  9)  spoke,  was  attained  when  the  Lord  Christ  entered 
and  taught  within  its  courts ;  but  the  destruction  of  the  second 
temple,  and  the  shaking  of  "the  heaven  and  the  land"  which  it 
represented,  prepared  the  way  for  the  nobler  temple  of  "  his  body, 
the  fulness  of  him  who  tills  all  things  in  all"  (Eph.  i,  23).  Of  this 
body  Christ  is  the  head,  the  husband,  and  Saviour  (Eph.  v,  23), 
having  loved  her  and  given  himself  for  her,  "  that  he  might  sanctify 
her,  having  purified  her  by  the  laver  of  water  in  the  word,  that  he 
himself  might  present  to  himself  in  glorious  beauty  the  Church, 
not  having  spot  or  wrinkle,  or  any  such  thing"  (Eph,  v,  26,  27).' 
This  glorious  Church  is  manifestly  the  same  as  the  Bride,  the  wife 
of  the  Lamb,  the  holy  city,  New  Jerusalem.  It  was  necessary  that 
tlie  Old  Testament  visible  Church  should  be  shaken  and  fall  and 
pass  away,  for  its  glory  had  departed ;  but  in  its  place  comes  forth 
"  the  whole  assembly  and  church  of  the  firstborn  who  are  enrolled 
in  heaven"  (Heb.  xii,  23). 

If,  furthermore,  we  allow  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
Aiiusion  of  brews  to  guide  us  to  a  right  understanding  of  the  New 
Heb.  xu,  22, 23.  Jerusalem,  we  will  observe  that  the  communion  and 
fellowship  of  New  Testament  saints  are  apprehended  as  heaven 
begun  on  earth.     It  is  altogether  probable  that  this  epistle  was 

come.    But  !|K3  is  plural,  and  has  naturally  for  its  subject  the  nations  (0^12)  just 

T 

mentioned.  So  in  Isa.  xxxv,  10,  "The  ransomed  of  Jehovah  shall  return,  and  come  to 
Zion,  with  shouting  and  everlasting  joy  upon  their  heads."  When  we  read  further, 
in  Isa.  Ixv,  18,  as  explanatory  of  the  new  heavens  and  new  land  (ver.  17),  "Behold, 
I  create  Jerusalem  a  rejoicing,  and  her  people  a  joy,"  we  will  find  therein  the  surest 
explanation  of  the  rnOPI,  delight,  of  Hag.  ii,  7.  The  New  Jerusalem,  the  New  Testa- 
ment Church  and  kingdom  of  God,  is  the  delight  and  desire  of  the  nations,  which,  ac- 
cording to  Rev.  xxi,  24,  walk  by  the  light  of  it. 

'  ''  The  union  of  Christ,"  says  Meyer,  "  with  his  Church,  at  the  parousia,  in  order 
to  confer  upon  it  Messianic  blessedness,  is  conceived  of  by  Paul  (as  also  by  Clirist 
himself.  Matt,  xxv,  1 ;  comp.  Rev.  xix,  7 ;  see  also  John  iii,  29)  under  the  figure  of  the 
bringing  home  of  a  bride,  wherein  Christ  appears  as  the  bridegroom,  and  sets  forth 
the  bride,  i.  e.,  his  Church,  as  a  spotless  virgin  (the  bodily  purity  is  a  representative 
of  the  ethical)  before  himself,  after  he  has  already  in  this  age  cleansed  it  by  the 
bath  of  bai)tism,  and  sanctified  it  through  his  word."— Critical  Com.  on  Ephesians, 
in  loco. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  491 

written  after  the  Book  of  Revelation/  and  direct  allusions  to  it  are 
apparent  in  the  following  passage  :  "  Ye  are  come  [7TQoaeAr]?iV'&aTe, 
ye  have  already  come)  nnto  Mount  Zion,  and  unto  the  city  of  the 
living  God,  the  heavenly  Jerusalem."  The  Christian  believer,  when 
his  life  becomes  hidden  with  Christ  in  God,  has  already  entered 
into  a  communion  and  fellowship  that  never  ceases.'*  His  name  is 
enrolled  in  heaven.  He  dwells  in  God  and  God  in  him,  and  all 
subsequent  glorification  in  time  and  in  eternity  is  but  a  continuous 
and  growing  realization  of  the  blessedness  of  the  Church  and  King- 
dom of  God. 

In  the  vision  of  the  New  Jerusalem  we  have  the  last  New  Testa- 
ment revelation  of  the  spiritual  and  heavenly  blessed-  New  Jerusalem 
ness  and  glory  of  which  the  Mosaic  tabernacle  was  a  the  heavenly 
material  symbol.  The  "dwelling  of  the  testimony"  the \abernacie 
(nnyn  ]3pD,  Exod.  xxxviii,  21)  and  its  various  vessels  symbolized. 
and  services  were  "copies  of  the  things  in  the  heavens"  (Heb. 
ix,  23),  and  Christ  has  entered  into  the  holy  places  "  through  the 
greater  and  more  perfect  tabernacle"  (Heb.  ix,  11),  thereby  making 
it  possible  for  all  true  believers  to  enter  "  with  boldness  into  the 
entrance  way  of  the  holies"  (Heb.  x,  19).  This  entrance  into  the 
holy  places  and  fellowships  is  realized  only  as  "  we  draw  near  with 
a  true  heart,  in  full  assurance  of  faith,  having  our  hearts  sprinkled 
from  an  evil  conscience,  and  the  body  washed  with  pure  water" 
(Heb.  X,  22),  and  such  spiritual  access  is  possible  to  us  now.  The 
Alpha  and  the  Omega,  accordingly,  says:  "Blessed  are  they  who 
wash  their  robes,  that  they  may  have  the  authority  over  the  tree 
of  life,  and  by  the  gates  may  enter  into  the  city  "  (Rev.  xxii,  14). 
This  city  is  represented  as  a  perfect  cube  in  form  (Rev.  xxi,  16), 
and  may  therefore  be  regarded  as  the  heavenly  Holy  of  Holies, 
into  the  entrance  way  (etaodov)  of  which  we  may  now  approach. 
All  this  accords  with  the  voice  from  the  throne,  which  said :  "  Be- 
hold the  tabernacle  of  God  is  with  men,  and  he  will  tabernacle  with 
them,  and  they  shall  be  his  people,  and  God  himself  shall  be  with 
them"  (Rev.  xxi,  3).  Herein  we  discern  the  true  antitype  of  the 
ancient  tabernacle  and  temple,  and  hence  it  is  that  this  holy  city 

*  Comp.  the  "innumerable  company  of  angels"  (Heb.  xii,  22)  with  Rev.  v,  11 ;  and 
the  "assembly  and  church  enrolled  in  heaven"  with  Rev.  xiii,  8;  xxi,  21;  and  "spirits 
of  just  men  made  perfect"  with  Rev.  vii,  13-17.  References  and  allusions  as  direct 
and  explicit  as  these,  made  by  any  of  the  early  Fathers  to  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, would  be  regarded  by  all  critics  as  indisputable  evidence  of  the  pre-existence 
of  such  books.  Comp.  Cowles,  The  Revelation  of  John,  p.  22  ;  Glasgow,  The  Apoca- 
lypse, Translated  and  Expounded,  pp.  29,  30. 

^  Comp.  Riehm,  Messianic  Prophecy,  pp.  164-166.    Edinb.,  1876. 


493  PRINCIPLES  OF 

admits  of  no  temple,  and  no  light  of  sun  and  moon,  for  the  Lord 
God,  the  Almighty,  and  the  Lamb  are  its  light  and  its  temple 
(Rev.  xxi,  22,  23).  Moreover,  no  cherubim  appear  within  this  Holy 
of  Holies,  for  these  former  symbols  of  redeemed  humanity  are  now 
supplanted  by  the  innumerable  company  of  Adam's  race,  from 
whom  the  curse  {Karddeixa,  Rev.  xxii,  3)  has  been  removed,  and 
who  take  their  places  about  the  throne  of  God  and  of  the  Lamb, 
act  as  his  servants  there,  behold  his  face,  and  have  his  name  upon 
their  foreheads  (Rev.  xxii,  3,  4).' 

The  New  Jerusalem,  then,  is  the  apocalyptic  portraiture  of  the 
New  Testament  Church  and  Kingdom  of  God.  Its  symbolism  ex- 
hibits the  heavenly  nature  of  the  communion  and  fellowship  of  God 
and  his  people,  which  is  entered  here  by  faith,  but  which  opens 
into  unspeakable  fulness  of  glory  through  ages  of  ages. 

There  is  room  for  differences  of  opinion  in  the  interpretation  of 
particular  passages  and  symbols  in  all  the  apocalyptic  Scriptures. 
But  attention  to  their  general  harmonies,  and  a  careful  study  of 
the  scope  and  outline  of  each  prophecy  as  a  whole,  will  go  far  to 
save  us  from  the  hopeless  confusion  and  contradiction  into  which 
many  by  neglecting  this  method  have  fallen. 

We  are  now  prepared  to  note  the  unity  and  harmony  of  New 
Summary  of  Testament  apocalyptics.  There  is  no  contradiction  be- 
New  Testa-  tween  the  teachings  of  Jesus,  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  and 
ment  Apoca-      ,.  ,  pti  ^  ■  \  tpi 

lyptics  and Es-  the  Apocalypse  or  John,  touchmg  the  end  or  the  age 

chatoiogy.  ^^^^  ^Y\e  coming  of  the  Lord.  They  all  agree  that  the 
end  was  near  at  hand,  and  that  the  Lord  would  come  in  his  king- 
dom before  that  generation  should  pass  away.  It  is  further  evi- 
dent that  the  coming  of  Christ  is  pre-millennial,  for  it  is  the  formal 
assumption  of  the  dominion  and  power  and  judgment  which  he  will 
exercise  until  he  has  put  all  enemies  under  his  feet.  The  modern 
Chiliasts  have  done  the  Church  an  excellent  service  in  calling  atten- 
tion to  this  great  fact.  But  their  error  is  in  making  that  coming  yet 
future,  whereas  Jesus  affirmed  that  it  would  take  place  before  some 
of  those  who  heard  him  speak  should  taste  of  death.  The  post- 
millenarians,  on  the  other  hand,  err  in  confounding  the  parousia 
with  the  mysteries  of  that  final  hour  when  Christ  shall  give  over 
the  kingdom  to  the  Father,  and  God  shall  be  all  in  all.  Between 
these  two  events  the  Messianic  aM)n  intervenes.  Its  beginning  was 
like  the  little  mustard-seed,  or  like  the  stone  cut  out  of  the  moun- 
tain without  hands,  but  it  grows,  and  rolls  on,  and  will  increase  until 
it  becomes  a  great  mountain  and  fills  all  the  earth.     Its  history  and 

'  Compare  the  exposition  of  the  symbolism  of  the  tabernacle  and  its  services  on 
pp.  359-368,  above. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  493 

triumphs  are  still  mainly  in  the  future,  and  centuries  will  prob- 
ably elapse  before  it  reaches  fulness  of  development.  When  the 
Christ  shall  have  put  down  all  other  enemies  he  will  finally  abolish 
death.  At  that  hour  "  all  who  are  in  the  tombs  shall  hear  his  voice, 
and  shall  come  forth;  those  who  did  good  unto  a  resurrection  of 
life,  and  those  who  wrought  evil  unto  a  resurrection  of  damnation  " 
(John  V,  28).  This  resurrection  is  associated  with  the  last  judg- 
ment (Rev.  XX,  12-15).  The  final  manifestation  of  the  Christ,  when 
he  shall  have  completed  the  work  of  redemption,  and  delivers  over 
the  kingdom  to  the  Father,  is  left  by  the  sacred  writers  in  too  great 
mystery  for  us  to  afiirm  definitely  any  thing  concerning  it. 


'  ^•» 


CHAPTER   XXVII. 

NO    DOUBLE    SENSE    IN    PROPHECY. 

The  hermeneutical  principles  which  we  have  now  set  forth  neces- 
sarily exclude  the  doctrine  that  the  prophecies  of  Scripture  contain 
an  occult  or  double  sense.  It  has  been  alleged  by  some  that  as 
these  oracles  are  heavenly  and  divine  we  should  expect  to  find  in 
them  manifold  meanings.  They  must  needs  differ  from  other 
books.  Hence  has  arisen  not  only  the  doctrine  of  a  double  sense, 
but  of  a  threefold  and  fourfold  sense,  and  the  rabbis  Theory  of  a 
went  so  far  as  to  insist  that  there  are  "mountains  of  trouble  sense 
sense  in  every  word  of  Scripture."  We  may  readily  sound  inter- 
admit  that  the  Scrij)tures  are  capable  of  manifold  prac-  P^^^t-'^tio'i- 
tical  opplications ;  otherwise  they  would  not  be  so  useful  for  doc- 
trine, correction,  and  instruction  in  righteousness  (2  Tim.  iii,  16). 
But  the  moment  we  admit  the  principle  that  portions  of  Scripture 
contain  an  occult  or  double  sense  we  introduce  an  element  of  un- 
certainty in  the  sacred  volume,  and  unsettle  all  scientific  interpre- 
tation. "If  the  Scripture  has  more  than  one  meaning,"  says  Dr. 
Owen,  "it  has  no  meaning  at  all."  "I  hold,"  says  Ryle,  "that  the 
words  of  Scripture  were  intended  to  have  one  definite  sense,  and 
that  our  first  object  should  be  to  discover  that  sense,  and  adhere 
rigidly  to  it.  .  .  .  To  say  that  words  do  mean  a  thing  merely  be- 
cause they  can  be  tortured  into  meaning  it  is  a  most  dishonourable 
and  dangerous  way  of  handling  Scripture."  ^  "  This  scheme  of  in- 
terpretation," says  Stuart,  "forsakes  and  sets  aside  the  common 

'  Expository  Thoughts  on  St.  Luke,  vol.  i,  p.  383. 


494  PRINCIPLES  OP 

laws  of  language.  The  Bible  excepted,  in  no  book,  treatise,  epis- 
tle, discourse,  or  conversation,  ever  written,  published,  or  addressed 
by  any  one  man  to  his  fellow  beings  (unless  in  the  way  of  sport, 
or  with  an  intention  to  deceive),  can  a  double  sense  be  found.  There 
are,  indeed,  charades,  enigmas,  phrases  with  a  double  entente,  and 
the  like,  perhaps,  in  all  languages;  there  have  been  abundance  of 
heathen  oracles  which  were  susceptible  of  two  interpretations;  but 
even  among  all  these  there  never  has  been,  and  there  never  was  a 
design  that  there  should  be,  but  one  sense  or  meaning  in  reality. 
Ambiguity  of  language  may  be,  and  has  been,  designedly  resorted 
to  in  order  to  mislead  the  reader  or  hearer,  or  in  order  to  conceal 
the  ignorance  of  soothsayers,  or  to  provide  for  their  credit  anud 
future  exigencies;  but  this  is  quite  foreign  to  the  matter  of  a  seri- 
ous and  bona  fide  double  meaning  of  words.  Nor  can  we  for  a  mo- 
ment, without  violating  the  dignity  and  sacredness  of  the  Scriptures, 
suppose  that  the  inspired  writers  are  to  be  compared  to  the  authors 
of  riddles,  conundrums,  enigmas,  and  ambiguous  heathen  oracles." ' 
Some  writers  have  confused  this  subject  by  connecting  it  Avith 
Typology  and  the  doctrine  of  type  and  antitype.  As  many  persons 
double  sense  of  2i\i^  events  of  the  Old  Testament  were  types  of  greater 

language     not  ... 

to  be  con-  ones  to  come,  so  the  language  respectmg  them  is  sup- 
founded,  posed  to  be  capable  of  a  double  sense.  The  second 
Psalm  has  been  supposed  to  refer  both  to  David  and  Christ,  and 
Isa.  vii,  14-16,  to  a  child  born  of  a  virgin  who  lived  in  the  time  of 
the  prophet,  and  also  to  the  Messiah.  Psalms  xlv  and  Ixxii  have 
been  supposed  to  have  a  double  reference  to  Solomon  and  Christ,  and 
the  prophecy  against  Edom  in  Isa.  xxxiv,  5-10, to  comprehend  also 
the  general  judgment  of  the  last  day.*  But  it  should  be  seen  that 
in  the  case  of  types  the  language  of  the  Scripture  has  no  double 
sense.  The  types  themselves  are  such  because  they  prefigure 
things  to  come,  and  this  fact  must  be  kept  distinct  from  the  ques- 
tion of  the  sense  of  language  used  in  any  particular  passage.  We 
have  shown  above  (pp.  399,  400)  that  the  language  of  Psa.  ii  is  not 
applicable  to  David  or  Solomon,  or  any  other  earthly  ruler.  The 
same  maybe  said  of  Psalms  xlv  and  Ixxii.  Isa.  vii,  14  was  fulfilled 
in  the  birth  of  Jesus  Christ  (Matt,  i,  22),  and  no  expositor  has  ever 
been  able  to  prove  a  previous  fulfilment.'     The  oracle  against  Edom 

'  Hints  on  the  Interpretation  of  Prophecy,  p.  11.     Andover,  1842. 

'•'.See  Davidson's  Hermcneutics,  pp.  49,  50.  Woodhouse  on  the  Apocalypse,  pp. 
172-174.     Home,  Introduction,  vol.  ii,  pp.  404-408. 

°  It  IS  not  impo.ssiblc,  however,  that  such  an  event  occurred  in  the  days  of  Aliaz, 
and  served,  in  its  way,  as  a  type  of  the  birth  of  Jesus  from  the  Virgin  Mary.  IJut 
upon  this  suppo.siiion  the  language  of  the  passage  would  have  no  double  sense,  and 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  495 

(Isa,  xxxiv,  5-10),  like  that  against  Babylon  (Isa.  xii),  is  clothed  in 
the  highly  wrought  language  of  apocalyptic  prophecy,  and  gives  no 
warrant  to  the  theory  of  a  double  sense.  The  twenty-fourth  of 
Matthew,  so  commonly  relied  on  to  support  this  theory,  has  been 
already  shown  to  furnish  no  valid  evidence  of  either  an  occult  or  a 
double  sense. 

Some  plausibility  is  given  to  the  theory  by  adducing  the  sug- 
gestive fulness  of  some  parts  of  the  prophetic  Scrip-  The  suggestive 
tures.  Such  fulness  is  readily  admitted,  and  ever  to  be  [Hj.e'^nrproof'of 
extolled.  The  first  prophecy  is  a  good  example.  The  a  double  sense. 
enmity  between  the  seed  of  the  woman  and  that  of  the  serpent 
(Gen.  iii,  15)  has  been  exhibited  in  a  thousand  forms.  The  precious 
words  of  promise  to  God's  people  find  more  or  less  fulfilment  in 
every  individual  experience.  But  these  facts  do  not  sustain  the 
theory  of  a  double  sense.  The  sense  in  every  case  is  direct  and 
simple;  the  applications  and  illustrations  are  many.  Such  facts  give 
no  authority  for  us  to  go  into  apocalyptic  prophecies  with  the  ex- 
pectation of  finding  two  or  more  meanings  in  each  specific  state- 
ment, and  then  to  declare:  This  verse  refers  to  an  event  long  past, 
this  to  something  yet  future;  this  had  a  partial  fulfilment  in  the 
ruin  of  Babylon,  or  Edom,  but  it  awaits  a  grander  fulfilment  in  the 
future.  The  judgment  of  Babylon,  or  Nineveh,  or  Jerusalem,  may, 
indeed,  be  a  type  of  every  other  similar  judgment,  and  is  a  warn- 
ing to  all  nations  and  ages;  but  this  is  very  different  from  say- 
ing that  the  language  in  which  that  judgment  was  predicted  was 
fulfilled  only  partially  when  Babylon,  or  Nineveh,  or  Jerusalem 
fell,  and  is  yet  aw\aiting  its  complete  fulfilment. 

We  have  already  seen  that  the  Bible  has  its  riddles,  enigmas, 
and  dark  sayings,  but  whenever  they  are  given  the  context  clearly 
advises  us  of  the  fact.  To  assume,  in  the  absence  of  any  hint,  that 
we  have  an  enigma,  and  in  the  face  of  explicit  statements  to  the 
contrary,  that  any  specific  prophecy  has  a  double  sense,  a  primary 
and  a  secondary  meaning,  a  near  and  a  remote  fulfilment,  must 
necessarily  introduce  an  element  of  uncertainty  and  confusion  into 
biblical  interpretation. 

The  same  may  be  said  about  explicit  designations  of  time.  When  a 
writer  says  that  an  event  will  shortly  and  speedily  come  No  misleading 
to  pass,  or  is  about  to  take  place,  it  is  contrary  to  all  pro-  tj^jf  "^  p°opb. 
priety  to  declare  that  his  statements  allow  us  to  believe  ecy. 
the  event  is  in  the  far  future.  It  is  a  reprehensible  abuse  of  lan- 
guage to  say  that  the  words  immediately,  or  near  at  hand,  mean 

its  fulfilment  in  the  birth  of  Jesus  would  be  like  the  fulfilment  of  Hosea  xi,  1  in  the 
return  of  the  child  Jesus  out  of  Egypt. 


496  FRINCIPLES   OF 

■ages  hence,  or  after  a  long  time.  Such  a  treatment  of  the  language 
•of  Scripture  is  even  worse  than  the  theory  of  a  double  sense.  And 
yet  interpreters  have  appealed  to  2  Peter  iii,  8  as  furnishing  in- 
spired authority  to  disregard  designations  of  time  in  prophecy. 
*'■  Let  not  this  one  thing  be  hid  from  you,  beloved,  that  one  day 
with  the  Lord  is  as  a  thousand  years,  and  a  thousand  years  as  one 
day."  This  statement,  it  is  urged,  is  made  with  direct  reference  to 
the  time  of  the  Lord's  coming,  and  illustrates  the  arithmetic  of 
•God,  in  Avhicli  soon,  quickly,  and  similar  terms  may  denote  ages. 
A  careful  attention  to  this  passage,  however,  will  show  that  it 
teaches  no  such  strange  doctrine  as  this. 

The  language  in  question  is  a  poetical  citation  from  Psa.  xc,  4, 

.  ,^  ^   and  is  adduced  to  show  that  the  lapse  of  time  does  not 

A  thousand  .  '■ 

years   as  one  invalidate   the   promises    of   God.      Whatever  he  has 
^^'  pledged  will   come  to  pass,  however  men  may  think 

or  talk  about  his  tardiness.  Days  and  years  and  ages  do  not  affect 
him.  From  everlasting  to  everlasting  he  is  God  (Psa.  xc,  2). 
But  this  is  very  different  from  saying  that  when  the  everlasting 
God  promises  something  shortly,  and  declares  that  it  is  close  at 
hand,  he  may  mean  that  it  is  a  thousand  years  in  the  future. 
Whatever  he  has  promised  indefinitely  he  may  take  a  thousand 
years  or  more  to  fulfil;  but  what  he  aflSrms  to  be  at  the  door  let  no 
man  declare  to  be  far  away.  "It  is  surely  unnecessary,"  says  a 
recent  writei",  "to  repudiate  in  the  strongest  manner  such  a  non- 
natural  method  of  interpreting  the  language  of  Scripture.  It  is 
worse  than  ungrammatical  and  unreasonable,  it  is  immoral.  It  is 
to  suggest  that  God  has  two  weights  and  two  measures  in  his  deal- 
ings  with  men,  and  tliat  in  his  mode  of  reckoning  there  is  an  am- 
biguity and  variableness  which  makes  it  impossible  to  tell  what 
manner  of  time  the  Spirit  of  Christ  in  the  prophets  may  signify. 
It  seems  to  imply  that  a  day  may  not  mean  a  day,  nor  a  thousand 
years  a  thousand  years,  but  that  either  may  mean  the  other.  If 
this  were  so,  there  could  be  no  interpretation  of  i:)rophecy  possible; 
it  would  be  deprived  of  all  precision,  and  even  of  all  credibility; 
for  it  is  manifest  that  if  there  could  be  such  ambiguity  and  uncer- 
tainty in  respect  to  time,  there  might  be  no  less  ambiguity  and  un- 
"Certainty  in  respect  to  every  thing  else.  .  .  .  Faithfulnesb  is  one 
of  the  attributes  most  frequently  ascribed  to  the  covenant-keeping 
God,  and  the  divine  faithfulness  is  that  which  the  apostle  in  this 
•  very  passage  affirms.  To  the  taunt  of  the  scoffers  who  impugn  the 
faithfulness  of  God,  and  ask,  '  Where  is  the  promise  of  his  com- 
ing?' he  answers,  'the  Lord  is  not  slack  concerning  his  promises  as 
some  men  count  slackness.'     Long  or  short,  a  day  or  an  age,  does 


BIBLICAL    HEKMENEUTICS.  497 

not  affect  his  faithfulness.  He  keepeth  truth  forever.  But  the 
apostle  does  not  say  that  when  the  Lord  promises  a  thing  for  to- 
day he  may  not  fulfil  his  promise  for  a  thousand  years:  that  would 
be  slackness  ;  that  would  be  a  breach  of  promise.  He  does  not  say 
that  because  God  is  infinite  and  everlasting,  therefore  he  reckons 
with  a  different  arithmetic  from  ours,  or  speaks  to  us  in  a  double 
sense,  or  uses  two  different  weights  and  measures  in  his  dealings 
with  mankind.     The  very  reverse  is  the  truth."  ' 

As  an  illustration  of  the  fallacious  and  confusing  theory  of  a 
double  sense,  especially  when  applied  to  prophetic  des-  Fallacies  of 
isrnations  of  time,  witness  the  following  from  Ben  gel.    ?f,fff„L„w" 

&  '  »  o         ory  of  propnet- 

Commenting  on  the  words,  "Immediately  after  the  ic perspective. 
tribulation  of  those  days,"  in  Matt,  xxiv,  29,  he  says:  "You  will 
say  it  is  a  great  leap  from  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  to  the  end 
of  the  world  which  is  subjoined  to  it  immediately.  I  reply,  a 
prophecy  resembles  a  landscape  painting  which  represents  distinctly 
the  houses,  paths,  and  bridges  in  the  foreground,  but  brings  to- 
gether, into  a  narrow  space,  most  widely  severed  valleys  and  moun- 
tains in  the  distance.  Such  a  view  should  they  who  study  proph- 
ecy have  of  the  future  to  which  the  prophecy  refers.  And  the 
eyes  of  the  disciples,  who  in  their  question  had  connected  the  end 
of  the  temple  with  that  of  the  world,  are  left  somewhat  in  the 
dark  (for  it  was  not  yet  time  to  know,  ver.  36);  hence  they  after- 
ward, Avith  entire  harmony,  imitated  the  Lord's  language,  and  de- 
clared that  the  end  was  at  hand.  By  advancing,  however,  both  the 
prophecy  and  the  prospect  continually  reveal  a  further  and  still 
further  distance.  In  this  manner  also  we  ought  to  interpret,  not 
the  clear  by  the  obscure,  but  the  obscure  by  the  clear,  and  to  re- 
vere in  its  dark  sayings  the  divine  wisdom  which  sees  all  things 
always,  but  does  not  reveal  all  things  at  once.  Afterward  it  was 
revealed  that  antichrist  should  come  before  the  end  of  the  world; 
and  again  Paul  joined  these  two  things  closely,  until  the  Apocalypse 
placed  even  millenniums  between.  On  such  passages  there  rests,  as 
St.  Anthony  used  to  call  it,  a  prophetical  cloudlet.  It  was  not  yet 
time  to  reveal  the  whole  series  of  future  events  from  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  to  the  end  of  the  world."" 

Here,  we  may  say,  are  almost  as  many  fallacies,  or  misleading 
statements,  as  there  are  sentences.    The  figure  of  a  land-    . 

.      .  .         .  .       .  .         .  -^-^  many  falla- 

scape   painting  with  its  principles  of  perspective  is  a  cies  as  sen- 
favourite  illustration  with  those  expositors  who  advo-      ^^^^' 

'  The  Parousia,  pp.  221-223. 

*  Gnomon  of  the  New  Testament,  in  loco.     Lewis  and  Vincent's  translation.     Phil- 
adelphia, 1860. 
32 


498  PRINCIPLES   OF 

cate  the  theory  of  a  double  sense,  and  some,  who  reject  such  the- 
ory, employ  this  figure  to  illustrate  the  uncertainty  of  propiietic 
designations  of  time.  But  it  is  a  great  error  to  apply  this  illus- 
tration to  specific  designations  of  time.  Where  no  particular  time 
is  indicated,  or  where  time-limitations  are  kept  out  of  view,  the 
figure  may  be  allowed,  and  is,  indeed,  a  happy  illustration.  But 
when  the  Lord  says  that  certain  events  are  to  follow  immediately 
after  certain  other  events,  let  no  interpreter  presume  to  say  that  mil- 
lenniums may  come  between.  This  is  not  "  to  interpret  the  obscure 
by  the  clear,"  but  to  obscure  the  clear  by  a  misleading  fancy.  To 
say  that  "  the  eyes  of  the  disciples  were  left  in  the  dark,"  and  that 
they  afterward,  "  imitating  the  Lord's  language,  declared  that  the 
end  was  at  hand,"  is  virtually  equivalent  to  saying  that  Jesus  misled 
them,  and  that  they  went  forth  and  perpetuated  the  error  !  The 
notion  that  any  portion  of  Scripture  "  reveals  the  whole  series 
of  events  from  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  to  the  end  of  the 
world,"  is  a  fancy  of  modern  interpreters,  who  would  all  do  well, 
like  the  pious  Bengel,  to  confess  that  over  their  forced  method 
of  explaining  the  statements  of  Christ  and  the  apostles  there  truly 
rests  an  obscuring  "  prophetical  cloudlet." 

There  are,  indeed,  manifold  applications  of  certain  prophecies 
Practical  ap-  which  may  be  called  generic,  and  some  events  of  mod- 
prophec^  may  ^^^  history  may  illustrate  them,  and,  in  a  broad  sense, 
be  many.  fulfil  them  as  truly  as  the  events   to  which  they  had 

original  reference.  In  the  days  of  John  many  antichrists  had  ap- 
peared (1  John  ii,  18;  corap.  Matt,  xxiv,  5,  24),  and  the  demoniacal 
attributes  of  Paul's  "man  of  sin"  (2  Thess.  ii,  3-8)  may  appear 
again  and  again  in  monsters  of  lawlessness  and  crime.  Antiocluis 
and  Nero  are  definite  typical  illustrations  in  whom  great  prophecies 
were  specifically  fulfilled,  but  other  similar  impersonations  of  wick- 
edness may  also  have  revealed  the  beast  from  the  abyss,  which  was, 
and  then,  after  disappearing  for  a  time,  appeared  again,  and  then 
again  went  into  perdition  (Rev.  xvii,  8).  But  such  allowable  ap- 
plications of  prophecy  are  not  to  be  confounded  with  grammatico- 
historical  interpretation.  When  Satan  shall  be  loosed  out  of  his 
prison  after  the  millennium  (Rev.  xx,  V)  he  may,  indeed,  reveal 
himself  in  some  man  of  sin  more  fearful  and  more  lawless  far  than 
any  Antiochus  or  Nero  of  the  past. 

It  may,  in  truth,  be  said  that  a  large  proportion  of  the  confusion 
and  errors  of  biblical  expositors  has  arisen  from  mistaken  notions 
of  the  Bible  itself.'     No  such  confusion  and  diversity  of  views  ap- 

'  This  thouglit  is  made  prominent  in  Hofman's  valuable  work,  Biblische  Ilerme- 
neutik.     Nordlingen,  1880. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  499 

pear  in  the  interpretation  of  other  books.     A  strained  and  unnatu- 
ral theory  of  divine  inspiration  has,  doubtless,  led  many   ,  . 

111-/.  •  1  1       o      •  Mistaken     no- 

mto  the  habit  of  assuming  that  somehow  the  Scriptures  tions  of  the  Bi- 
must  be  explained  differently  from  other  compositions,  cause'^of  much 
Hence,  also,  the  assumption  that  in  prophetic  revela-  false  exposi- 
tions God  has  furnished  us  with  a  detailed  historical 
outline  of  particular  occurrences  ages  in  advance,  so  that  we  may 
properly  expect  to  find  such  events  as  the  rise  of  Islam,  the  Wars 
of  the  Roses,  and  the  French  Revolution  recorded  in  the  propb.ct- 
ical  books.  This  assumption  is  often  found  attaching  itself  to  i; 
theory  of  a  double  or  triple  sense.  The  interpretation  of  the  Apoc- 
alypse of  John  has  especially  suffered  from  this  singular  error. 
There  is  such  a  charm  in  the  fancy  that  we  have  a  New  Testament 
prophecy  of  the  events  of  all  coming  time — a  graphic  outline  of 
the  history  of  the  Church  and  the  world  until  the  final  judgment — 
that  not  a  few  have  yielded  to  the  delusion  that  we  may  reasonably 
search  this  mystic  book  for  any  character  or  event  which  we  deem 
important  in  the  history  of  human  civilization.' 

We  must  set  aside  these  false  assumptions  touching  the  Bible  it- 
self, and  the  character  and  purjDort  of  its  prophecies.  A  rational 
investigation  of  the  scope  and  analogies  of  the  great  prophecies 
gives  no  support  to  such  extravagant  fancies  as  that  "  the  whole 
Apocalypse  of  John,  from  chapter  iv  to  the  end,  is  but  a  develoj)- 
ment  of  Daniel's  imperfect  tense."*  The  Holy  Scriptures  have 
lessons  for  all  time.  God's  specific  revelation  to  one  individual, 
age,  or  nation  will  be  found  to  have  a  practical  value  for  all  men. 
We  need  no  specific  predictions  of  Napoleon,  or  of  the  Waldenses, 
or  of  the  martyrdom  of  John  Huss,  or  of  the  massacre  of  St.  Bar- 
tholomew to  confirm  the  faith  of  the  Church,  or  to  convince  the 
infidel;  else,  doubtless,  we  should  have  had  them  in  a  form  capa- 
ble of  producing  conviction.  It  cannot  be  shown  that  such  pre- 
dictions would  have  accomplished  any  worthy  purpose  not  already 
met  by  fulfilled  prophecies  with  their  practical  lessons  of  univei-sal 
application. 

'  A  friend  of  the  writer  once  observed :  It  always  seemed  strange  to  me  that  Baby- 
lon, and  Persia,  and  Greece,  and  Rome,  and  European  states  should  be  noticed  in  the 
prophecies,  and  yet  no  mention  of  the  United  States  of  America.  He,  accordingly, 
set  himself  to  work  to  find  something  on  the  subject,  and  by  and  by  discovered  the 
great  North  American  Republic  in  the  fifth  kingdom  of  Daniel — the  stone  cut  out  of 
the  mountain  without  hands.  Further  research  in  the  same  line  soon  enabled  him 
to  see  that  the  "war  in  heaven"  between  Michael  and  the  dragon  (Rev.  xii,  7)  was  a 
specific  prophecy  of  the  late  civil  war  between  the  Northern  and  Southern  States, 
which  resulted  in  the  abolition  of  American  slavery. 

^  Pre-Millennial  Essays  of  tlie  Prophetic  Conference,  {).  326.     New  York,  1879. 


500  PRINCIPLES  OF 


CHAPTER  XXVm. 

SCRIPTURE    QUOTATIONS   IN   THE    SCRIPTURES. 

In  comparing  Scripture  with  Script  are,  and  tracing  the  parallel  and 
analogous  passages  of  the  several  sacred  writers,  the  interpreter 
continually  meets  with  quotations,  more  or  less  exact,  made  by  one 
writer  from  another.  These  quotations  may  be  distributed  into 
Four  classes  of  f^ur  classes:  (1)  Old  Testament  parallel  passages  and 
quotations.  quotations  made  by  the  later  writers  from  the  earlier 
books ;    (2)  New  Testament  quotations  from  the  Old  Testament ; 

(3)  New  Testament  quotations  from  Ncav  Testament  sources;  and 

(4)  quotations  from  apocryphal  writings  and  oral  tradition.  The 
verbal  variations  of  many  of  these  citations,  the  formulas  and 
methods  of  quotation,  and  the  illustrations  they  furnish  of  the  pur- 
poses and  uses  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  are  all  matters  of  great  im- 
portance to  the  biblical  exegete. 

As  examples  of  each  of  these  classes  of  citations  we  mention. 
Examples  of  first,  genealogical  tables,  as  Gen.  xi,  10-26,  compared 
uuSUarl  ^^itb  1  Chron.  i,  lV-27,  and  Gen.  xlvi  compared  with 
aiieis.  Num.  xxvi.      Psa.  xviii  is  substantially  identical  with 

2  Sam.  xxii.  The  same  is  true  of  2  Kings  xviii-xx  and  Isa.  xxxvi- 
xxxix,  2  Kings  xxiv,  xxv,  and  Jer.  lii.  Large  j^ortions  of  the  Books 
of  Samuel  and  Kings  are  appropriated  in  the  Books  of  Chronicles, 
and  there  are  numerous  textual  parallels  like  Psa.  xlii,  7,  and  Jonah 
ii,  3.  The  New  Testament  quotations  from  the  Old  Testament  are 
manifold  in  character  and  form.  In  most  cases  they  are  taken  iier- 
batim,  or  nearly  so,  from  the  Septuagint  version ;  in  some  instances 
they  are  a  translation  of  the  Hebrew  text,  more  accurate  than  that 
of  the  Septuagint  (Matt,  ii,  15,  compared  with  Heb.  and  Sept.  of 
Hos.  xi,  1;  Matt,  viii,  17,  comp.  Isa.  liii,  4).  Some  of  the  quota- 
tions differ  notably  both  from  the  Hebrew  and  the  Septuagint, 
while  others  were  apparently  constructed  by  a  use  of  both  sources. 
Sometimes  several  passages  of  the  Old  Testament  are  blended  to- 
gether, as  in  2  Cor.  vi,  16-18,  where  use  is  made  of  Exod.  xxix,  45 ; 
Lev.  xxvi,  12;  Isa.  lii,  11;  Jer.  xxxi,  1,  9,  33;  xxxii,  38;  Ezek. 
xi,  20;  xxxvi,  28;  xxxvii,  27;  Zech.  viii,  8.  Sometimes  the  Old 
Testament  passage  is  merely  paraphrased,  or  the  general  sentiment 
or  substance  is  given,  while  in  other  cases  it  is  merely  referreil  to 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  501 

or  hinted  at  (comp.  Prov.  xviii,  4 ;  Isa.  xii,  3 ;  xliv,  3,  with  John 
vii,  38.  Isa.  Ix,  1-3,  with  Eph.  v,  14.  Hos.  xiv,  2,  with  Heb.  xiii,  15).^ 
In  the  New  Testament  it  is  evident  that  the  many  parallel  portions 
of  the  Gospels  must  have  been  derived  from  some  common  source, 
either  oral  or  written,  or  both.  In  Acts  xx,  35,  Paul  quotes  a  say- 
ing of  the  Lord  which  is  to  be  found  nowhere  else.  Peter  evinces 
a  knowledge  of  the  epistles  of  Paul  (2  Pet.  iii,  15,  16),  and  in  the 
second  chapter  of  his  second  epistle  appropriates  much  from  the 
Epistle  of  Jude.     Finally,  the  quotations  from  apocrv- 

/  ,       .  i.  J       Apocryphal 

phal  and  other  sources,  and  allusions  to  them,  both  in  and  traditional 
the  Old  Testament  and  in  the  New,  are  quite  numerous.  ^°'^<'6^- 
Thus,  in  the  Old  Testament  we  have  "  The  Book  of  the  Wars  of  the 
Lord"  (Num.  xxi,  14),  "The  Book  of  Jasher"  (Josh,  x,  13),  "The 
Book  of  the  Acts  of  Solomon"  (1  Kings  xi,  41),  "The  Book  of 
Shemaiah"  (2  Chron.  xii,  15),  and  numerous  others  quoted  or  re- 
ferred to.  Jude  quotes  apparently  from  the  pseudepigraphal  Book 
of  Enoch,  and  also  makes  allusion  to  traditions  of  the  fall  of  the 
angels,  and  the  dispute  of  Michael  and  the  devil  over  the  body  of 
Moses  (Jude  6,  9,  14).  St.  Paul  calls  the  magicians,  who  opposed 
Moses,  Jannes  and  Jambres  (2  Tim.  iii,  8),  names  which  had  proba- 
bly been  transmitted  by  oral  tradition.  Many  such  traditions  found 
their  way  into  the  Targums,  the  Talmud,  and  the  apocryphal  and 
pseudepigraphal  Jewish  literature.  Quotations  from  such  books 
and  allusions  to  such  traditions  give  them  no  canonical  authority. 
An  apostle  or  any  one  else,  addressing  those  who  were  familiar  with 
such  traditions,  might  apj^ropriately  refer  to  them  for  homiletical 
purposes,  without  thereby  designing  to  assume  or  declare  tlicir 
verity.  Similarly  Paul  quotes  from  the  Greek  poets  Aratus,  Me- 
nander,  and  Epimenides  (Acts  xvii,  28;  1  Cor.  xv,  33;  Titus  i,  12). 
The  great  number  of  parallel  passages,  both  in  the  Old  Testament 
and  in  the  New,  is  evidence  of  a  harmony  and  organic  relation  of 
Scripture  Avith  Scripture  of  a  most  notable  kind.  Once  written,  tlie 
oracles  of  God  became  the  public  and  private  treasure  of  his  people. 
Any  passage  that  would  servQ  a  useful  purpose  was  used  by  prophet 

'  See  Drusius,  Parallela  Sacra,  etc.,  in  vol.  viii  of  the  Critici  Sacri,  pp.  1261-1325; 
Davidson,  Sacred  Hermeneutics,  chap,  xi ;  Gough,  New  Testament  Quotations  Collated 
with  the  Old  Testament  (Lond.,  1853);  Home's  Introduction  (Ayers  and  Tregelles' 
Ed.),  vol.  ii,  pp.  113-207;  and  especially  Turpie,  The  Old  Testament  in  the  New;  A 
Contribution  to  Biblical  Criticism  and  Interpretation.  Lond.,  1868.  This  last-named 
work  conveniently  classifies  and  tabulates  the  Old  Testament  quotations  in  the  New 
Testament  according  to  their  agreement  with,  or  variation  from,  both  the  Hebrew  text 
and  the  Scptuagint  version.  Comp.  also  Scott,  Principles  of  New  Testament  Quota- 
tion established  and  applied  to  Biblical  Science  (Edinb.,  187-5),  and  Boehl,  Die  alttesta- 
mentlichen  Citate  im  neuen  Testament.  Wien,  1878. 


502  PRINCIPLES   OF 

or  apostle  as  part  of  a  common  heritage.  With  this  understanding, 
there  is  little  in  the  matter  or  style  of  the  Scripture  quotations  in 
the  Scriptures  to  give  any  trouble  to  the  interpreter, 
quotations  in  The  comparison  of  parallel  passages  is,  as  we  have  seen 
the  N.T.  call  for  ^pp  221-230),  a  great  help  in  exposition,  and  some  pas- 
neuticai  treat-  sages  become  clear  and  forcible  only  when  read  in  the 
^*^^  '  light  of  their  parallels.     The  alleged  discrepancies  be- 

tween these  different  Scriptures  will  be  noticed  in  a  separate  chapr 
ter;  it  is  only  the  Old  Testament  citations  in  the  New  Testament 
which  call  for  special  treatment  hero.  These,  as  we  have  said,  are 
so  manifold  in  character  and  form  that  we  should  examine  (1)  the 
sources  of  quotation,  (2)  the  formulas  and  methods  of  quotation, 
and  (3)  the  purposes  of  the  several  quotations. 

I,  It  is  now  generally  conceded  that  the  sources  from  which  the 
SourcesofN.T.  ^^w  Testament  writers  quote  are  the  Hebrew  text  of 
quotation.  the  Old  Testament,  and  the  Septuagint  translation  of  it. 
Formerly  it  was  maintained  by  some  that  the  Septuagint  only  was 
used ;  others,  feeling  that  such  a  position  was  disparaging  to  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures,  maintained  as  strenuously  that  the  apostles  and 
evangelists  must  have  always  cited  from  the  Hebrew,  and  though 
the  quotations  were  in  the  exact  words  of  the  Septuagint,  it  was 
thought  that  two  translators  might  have  used  the  same  language. 
But  calmer  study  has  made  all  such  discussions  obsolete.  It  is  well 
known  that  the  Septuagint  version  was  in  current  use  among  the 
Hellenistic  Jews.  The  New  Testament  writers  follow  it  in  some 
passages  where  it  differs  widely  from  the  Hebrew.  A  critical  com- 
parison of  all  the  New  Testament  citations  from  the  Old  shows  be- 
yond a  question  that  in  the  great  majority  of  cases  the  Septuagint 
rather  than  the  Hebrew  text  was  the  source  from  which  the  writers 
quoted.' 

But  it  is  noticeable  that  the  New  Testament  writers  do  not  uni- 
formly follow  either  source.     The  Septuagint  version 
Nouuiform  ...  .  -i^iTTi 

method  of  quo-   of  Mai.  iii,  1,  is  an  accurate  translation  of  the  Hebrew, 

tation.  ^^j^  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  agree  literally  in  a  ren- 

dering which  is  noticeably  different.^  In  short,  it  is  impossible  to 
discover  any  rule  that  will  account  for  all  the  variations  between 
the  citations  and  the  Hebrew  and  Septuagint  texts.    Sometimes  the 

'  See  Home's  Introduction,  vol.  ii,  pp.  114-178,  where  the  Hebrew,  the  Septuagint 
version,  and  the  New  Testament  citation  of  all  the  Old  Testament  quotations  in  tlie 
New,  arc  given  in  the  original  texts,  arranged  in  parallel  columns,  and  each  accom- 
panied by  an  English  version. 

*  Matt,  xi,  10;  Mark  i,  10;  Luke  vii,  27.  Matthew  inserts  eyu,  and  Mark  omits 
lu.npoa-&Ev  cov. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  503 

variation  is  merely  a  change  of  person,  number,  or  tense ;  some- 
times it  consists  of  a  transposition  of  words;  sometimes  in  the 
omission  or  addition  of  words  and  phrases.  In  many  cases  only  the 
general  sense  is  given,  and  often  the  citation  is  but  an  allusion  or 
reference,  not  a  formal  quotation  at  all.  In  view  of  all  these  facts 
it  seems  best  to  understand  that  the  sacred  writers  followed  no 
uniform  method  in  quoting  the  older  Scriptures.  They  were  famil- 
iar both  with  the  Hebrew  text  and  the  Septuagint.  But  textual 
-accuracy  had  no  special  weight  with  them.  From  childhood  the 
contents  of  the  sacred  writings  had  been  publicly  and  privately 
made  known  to  them  (2  Tim.  iii,  15),  and  they  were  wont  to  cite 
them  in  familiar  discourse  without  any  attempt  at  verbal  accuracy. 
With  them  as  with  us  an  inaccurate  quotation  mis:ht  be- 

-  ''■  '^  Inaccurate  quo- 

come  common  and  current  on  the  lips  of  the  people,  and,   tations  may  be- 

while  known  by  many  to  differ  from  the  ancient  text,  come  current, 
was  nevertheless  sufficiently  correct  for  all  practical  purposes.  How 
few  of  us  now  recite  the  Lord's  prayer  accurately  ?  So,  doubtless, 
the  inspired  writers  made  use  of  Scripture,  in  many  instances,  with- 
out care  to  conform  the  quotation  with  the  exact  letter  of  the 
Hebrew  text,  or  of  the  common  Sei^tuagint  version.  They  quoted 
probably  in  most  cases  from  memory,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  pre- 
served them  from  any  vital  error  (John  xiv,  26).  The  idea  that 
divine  inspiration  must  necessitate  verbal  uniformity  among  the 
sacred  writers  is  an  unnecessary  and  untenable  assumption.'  Vari- 
ety marked  both  the  portions  and  manner  of  the  successive  revela- 
tions of  God  (Heb.  i,  1). 

11.  The  introductory  formulas  by  which  quotations  from  the  Old 
Testament  are  adduced  are  many  and  various,  and  have  pQ^j^uj^g  j^^^ 
been  thought  by  some  to  be  a  sort  of  index  or  key  to   methods   of 
the  particular  purpose  of  each  citation.     But  we  find   ^^°  ^  '*^°' 
different  formulas  used  by  different  writers  to  introduce  one  and  the 

'  "  In  examining  cited  passages,  we  perceive,"  says  Davidson,  "  that  every  mode  of 
quotation  has  been  employed,  from  the  exactest  to  the  most  loose,  from  the  strictest 
verbal  method  to  the  widest  paraphrase.  But  in  no  case  is  violence  done  to  the 
meaning  of  the  original.  A  sentiment  expressed  in  one  connexion  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  frequently  in  the  New  interwoven  with  another  train  of  argument ;  but  this  is 
allowable  and  natural.  .  .  .  Let  it  be  remembered,  then,  that  the  sacred  writers  were 
not  bound  in  all  cases  to  cite  the  very  words  of  the  originals ;  it  was  usually  sufficient 
for  them  to  exhibit  the  sense  perspicuously.  The  same  meaning  may  be  conveyed  by 
different  terms.  It  is  unreasonable  to  expect  that  the  apostles  should  scrupulously 
abide  by  the  precise  words  of  the  passage  they  quote.  ...  In  every  instance  we  sup- 
pose them  to  have  been  directed  by  the  superintending  Spirit,  who  infallibly  kept  them 
from  error,  and  guided  them  in  selecting  the  most  appropriate  terms  where  their  own 
judgments  would  have  failed." — Sacred  Hermeneutics,  pp.  469,  470. 


504  PRINCIPLES    OF      . 

same  passage,  so  that  we  cannot  suppose  that  in  all  cases  the 
formula  used  will  direct  us  to  the  special  purpose  of  the  quotation. 
The  more  usual  formulas  are,  "  It  is  written,"  "  Thus  it  is  written," 
"  According  as  it  is  written,"  "  The  Scripture  says,"  "  It  was  said," 
"According  as  it  is  said;"  but  many  other  forms  are  used.  The 
same  formulas  are  used  by  the  Rabbinical  writers,'  and  there  is 
every  reason  to  believe  that  they  exhibit  a  common  usage  of  our 
Lord's  time.  There  was  no  division  of  chapters  and  verses  to  facil- 
itate reference.  Occasionally  the  place  of  a  citation  is  indicated, 
as  in  Mark  xii,  26;  Acts  xiii,  33;  and  Rom.  xi,  2;  but  more  fre- 
quently Moses,  the  Law,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  or  some  other  prophet  is 

*  The  following  list  exhibits  in  parallel  columns  the  resemblance  between  the  New 
Testament  and  Rabbinical  formulas : 

New  Testament.  Rabbinical. 

nadu^  yeypaTTTai,  ovtu  yeypamai.,  yiypan-     ^^riDI,  3'^^^,  3^71313. 

Tai,  yeypannlvov  earl,  Kara  to  yeypajj. 

(levov. 
KnOug  elprjTai^  nara  to  elprifievov.  "UDXJtJ' 

ipl)edii.  ion\s. 

Tiiyei  t/  ypa<py,  elns  ij  ypa^i).  3in3n  "lOX,  or  Kip  l^X. 

tL  yap  Afyet  ij  ypacpr/ ;   ti  ovv  koTi  to  ye-  t 

ypafifjLEvov;  nug  yiypanTat.;  oiin  eoTi  ye-  <  aTlST  ''XO,  3^03  ""D,  etc. 

ypa/Xfievov ;  ( 

(5w  XtyEt.  niriDH  vtjy  nSyn. 

SioTS  nepLEx^i-  ev  Ty  ypatbri.  ly^DD  N"lpO,  or  n^n3n. 

(3l£TreTe  to  dprifxevov.  TDD  HD  HXI. 

TTwf  avayLvu)cii£Lg  ;  DStp  ^XO. 

TTpoidoiaa  ed  i)  ypat^rj.  ^IDSn  HN"!  HO,  etc. 

Tac,KaieuTovT^ndXcv,K<uivTovT!,?.e.     ^^^^^'^m    DHH   THSI   NDH  TDD, 
yec,  Kal  ndXcv  sTepa  ypafr,  liynv.  ^"'^^  a^HDinONX',  11^1   ^DIN,    etc. 

o  Abyoq  yeypafifievoc  ev  t^>  vofiu  avTuv.  nilD  131,  or  m"in3  31713. 

6  vofiog  iieysv.  mjDN  minn. 

avToq  yup  Aa/3i(5  elnev.  TlT  "iQN  p. 

Iva  n?iijpcjdn  n  ypacbf),  or  to  bridEV  dcd  tov  i 

npocpr/Tov.  I 

knXTipceri  7]  ypa<pTi.  3"'n3::>  no  D^p  nr. 

"  It  is  impossible,"  says  Davidson,  from  whom  the  above  list  is  taken,  "  for  any 
unprejudiced  reader  to  observe  the  coincidence  between  the  New  Testament  and  Rab- 
binical formulas  just  given  without  believing  that  the  one  class  was  influenced  and 
modified  by  the  other.  When  we  recollect  that  the  writers  were  Jews,  and  that  their 
modes  of  conception  and  speech  were  essentially  Jewish,  we  are  led  to  expect  in 
their  compositions  a  large  assimilation  to  current  phraseology." — Sacred  Hcrmeneu- 
tics,  pp.  440,  450.  Many  other  examples  are  given  by  Snrenhusius,  niJJ>J3n  ^DD»  sive 
Bl,d?.oc  KaXa?^?i.ay73g,pp.  1-36  ;  and  l)y  Dopke,  Hermeneutik,  pp.  60-69. 


BIBLICAL    HEKMENEUTICS.  503- 

mentioned  as  writing  or  saying  what  is  quoted.  It  is  assumed  that 
the  persons  addressed  were  so  familiar  with  the  holy  writings  that 
they  needed  no  more  specific  reference. 

"  Besides  the  quotations  introduced  by  these  formulas  there  are  a 
considerable  number  scattered  through  the  writings  of  the  apostles 
which  are  inserted  in  the  train  of  their  own  remarks  without  any 
announcement  whatever  of  their  being  cited  from  others.  To  the 
cursory  reader  the  passages  thus  quoted  appear  to  form  a  part  of 
the  apostle's  own  words,  and  it  is  only  by  intimate  acquaintance 
with  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  and  a  careful  comparison  of 
these  Avith  those  of  the  New  Testament,  that  the  fact  of  their  being 
quotations  can  be  detected.  In  the  common  version  every  trace  of 
quotation  is  in  many  of  these  passages  lost,  from  the  circumstance 
that  the  writer  has  closely  followed  the  Septuagint,  while  our  ver- 
sion of  the  Old  Testament  is  made  from  the  Hebrew.  Thus,  for 
instance,  in  2  Cor.  viii,  21,  Paul  says,  npovoovixev  yap  naXa  ov 
uovnv  EV(l)TXLov  Kvp/of,  dXXa  km  evdiinov  dv&pcjncjv,  which,  with  a 
change  in  the  mood  of  the  verb,  is  a  citation  of  the  Septuagint  ver- 
sion of  Prov.  iii,  4.  Hardly  any  trace  of  this,  however,  appears  in 
the  common  version,  where  the  one  j^assage  reads,  "  Providing  for 
honest  things  not  only  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,  but  also  in  the 
sight  of  men;"  and  the  other,  "So  shalt  thou  find  favour  and  good 
understanding  in  the  sight  of  God  and  man."  So,  also,  in  1  Peter 
iv,  18,  the  apostle  quotes  word  for  word  from  the  Septuagint  ver- 
sion of  Prov.  xi,  31,  the  clause  el  b  SiKaioq  iioXig  (joj^erat,  6  daeQrjg^ 
Kal  diiapTcoXdg  ttov  ^avdrai',  a  quotation  Avhicli  we  should  in  vain 
endeavour  to  trace  in  the  common  version  of  the  Proverbs,  where 
the  passage  in  question  is  rendered  "Behold,  the  righteous  shall  be 
recompensed  in  the  earth;  much  more  the  wicked  and  the  sinner." 
Such  quotations  evidently  show  how  much  the  minds  of  the  New 
Testament  writers  were  imbued  with  the  sentiments  and  expressions 
of  the  Old  Testament  as  exhibited  in  the  Alexandrine  version."  ' 

There  is  one  formula  peculiar  to  Matthew  and  John  which  de- 
serves more  than  a  passing  notice.  It  first  occurs  in  The  formula 
Matt,  i,  22:  ''All  this  has  come  to  2kcss  in  order  that  '>-^'"- ^^W^f^v- 
what  was  spoken  by  the  Lord  through  the  prophet  mujht  he  fiil- 
filledP  This  is  its  fullest  form;  elsewhere  it  is  only  Iva  'n'k7\pi^-&% 
in  order  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  (Matt,  ii,  15;  iv,  14;  xxi,  4;  John 
xii,  38;  xiii,  18;  xv,  25;  xvii,  12;  xviii,  9,  32;  xix,  24,  36),  but  in 
John's  Gospel  these  words  vary  in  their  connexion,  as,  "in  order 
that  the  word  of  Isaiah  might  be  fulfilled;"  "in  order  that  the 
Scripture  might  be  fulfilled;"  "in  order  that  the  word  of  Jesus 

'  Alexander,  in  Kitto's  New  Cyclopaedia  of  Biblical  Literature,  article  Quotiitions. 


506  PRINCIPLES   OF 

luiglit  be  fulfilled."  Sometimes  it  is  written  orrojg  -rrXriQiod^  (Matt, 
ii,  'JO;  viii,  17;  xii,  17),  and  occasionally  tote  e7rA7/pcji97/,  then  was 
fuljilled.  The  great  question  with  interpreters  has  been  to  deter- 
mine the  force  of  the  conjunction  Iva  (and  ottw^)  in  these  formulas. 
Is  it  telle,  that  is,  expressive  oi  final  cause,  purpose,  or  design;  or 
is  it  echatic,  denoting  merely  the  outcome  or  resxdt  of  something  ? 
If  telic,  it  should  be  translated  in  order  that ;  if  eebatic,  it  should  be 
rendered  so  that. 

Bengel,  commenting  on  the  words  'iva  -nXTjoj'&y  in  Matt,  i,  22,  ob- 
views  of  Ben-  serves:  "Wherever  this  phrase  occurs  we  are  bound  to 
gel  and  Meyer,  i-ecognise  the  authority  of  the  evangelists,  and  (how- 
ever dull  our  own  perception  may  be)  to  believe  that  the  event  they 
mention  does  not  merely  chance  to  correspond  with  some  ancient 
form  of  speech,  but  was  one  which  had  been  predicted,  and  which 
the  divine  truth  was  pledged  to  bring  to  pass  at  the  commencement 
■of  the  new  dispensation."  '  Meyer,  commenting  on  the  same  pas- 
sage, observes:  "'iva  is  never  eebatic,  so  that,  but  always  telic,  in 
order  that  /  it  presupposes  here  that  what  was  done  stood  in  the 
-connexion  of  purjaose  with  the  Old  Testament  declaration,  and  con- 
sequently in  the  connexion  of  the  divine  necessity  as  an  actual  fact 
by  which  the  prophecy  was  destined  to  be  fulfilled.  The  divine 
decree,  expressed  in  the  latter,  must  be  accomplished,  and  to  that 
end  this,  namely,  whicth  is  related  from  verse  18  onw\ard,  came  to 
pass,  and  that,  according  to  the  Avhole  of  its  contents  (oXov).''^ 

This  view  of  the  telic  force  of  'iva,  especially  in  the  words  Iva 
The  telic  force  7TX7]Qu)d'^  in  connexion  with  prophetic  statements,  is 
aiiy'tobe^main-  "laiiitained  by  many  of  the  most  eminent  critics  and 
tained.  scholars,  as  Fritzsche,  De  Wette,   Olshausen,   Alford, 

and  Winer.  Others,  as  Tittmann,  Stuart,  and  Robinson,  contend  for 
the  eebatic  use  of  'iva  in  this  phrase  as  well  as  in  many  other  pas- 
sages." The  question  can  be  determined  only  by  a  critical  exami- 
nation of  the  passages  where  the  alleged  eebatic  use  of  the  particle 
occurs.  In  most  of  these  cases  we  believe  the  ordinary  telic  sense 
of  'iva  has  been  misapprehended  by  a  superficial  view  of  the  real 
import  of  the  passage.  Thus  Tittmann  cites  Mark  xi,  25,  as  a  clear 
instance  of  the  eebatic  use  of  'Iva:  "Whenever  ye  stand  praying, 
forgive,  if  ye  have  aught  against  any  one,  in  order  that  your  Fa- 
ther also  Avho  is  in  the  heavens  may  forgive  you  your  trespasses." 

'  Gnomon  of  the  New  Testament,  in  loco. 

'  See  Tittmann's  essay  on  the  "  Use  of  the  particle  iva  in  the  Xow  Testament," 
translated  into  English  with  introductory  remarks  by  M.  Stuart  in  the  Biblical  Repos- 
itory of  Jan.,  18.S5.  Also  Robinson's  Lexicon  of  the  New  Testament  under  the  words 
2i'a  iind  uTTLir. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  507 

According  to  Tittmann,  "  the  Saviour  could  not  inculcate  on  his 
disciples  the  mere  prudential  duty  of  forgiving  others  in  order  that 
they  themselves  might  obtain  forgiveness,  which  would  be  quite 
foreign  to  real  integrity  and  purity  of  mind ;  but  he  wished  them  to 
consider  that  if  they  cherished  an  implacable  spirit  they  could  have 
no  grounds  to  hope  for  pardon  from  God;  so  that  if  they  them- 
selves were  not  ready  to  forgive  it  was  impossible  that  they  should 
obtain  forgiveness." '  But  this  reasoning  would  exclude  every- 
where the  telic  force  of  Iva.  According  to  the  writer's  own  admis- 
sion, the  forgiving  of  others  is  an  indispensable  condition  of  pardon; 
why  not  then  regard  this  condition,  as  Avell  as  any  other,  in  the 
light  of  a  means  to  an  end?  Is  it  possible  to  believe  that  obtain- 
ing forgiveness  from  God  is  an  object  and  aim  at  all  inconsistent 
with  "  real  integrity  and  purity  of  mind  ? "  Much  more  soundly 
does  Meyer  give  the  real  thought  of  the  passage:  "To  the  exhorta- 
tion to  confidence  in  prayer  Jesus  links  on  another  principal  requi- 
site of  being  heard — namely,  the  necessity  of  forgiving  in  order  to 
obtain  forgiveness."  ^  The  forgiving  is  presented  as  an  indispensa- 
ble means  to  an  end. 

It  need  not,  however,  be  denied  that  in  some  passages  the  ecbatic 
rendering  of  'iva  may  bring  out  more  clearly  the  sense  r^^^  ecbatic 
of  the  author.     The  particle  may  be  allowed  some  meas-   sense  of  Iva 

„    .  .  T     •  1  T       f»       1  DPed  not  in  all 

ure  or  its  native  telic  import,  and  yet  the  final  cause  or  cases  be  de- 
end  may  be  conceived  of  as  an  accomplished  result  or  °^^'** 
attainment  rather  than  an  objective  ideal  necessary  to  be  reached.^ 
Ellicott's  position  may  be  accepted  as  every  way  sound  and  satis- 
factory: "The  uses  of  Iva  in  the  New  Testament  appear  to  be  three: 
(1)  Final,  or  indicative  of  the  end,  purpose,  or  ohject  of  the  action 
— the  primary  and  principal  meaning,  and  never  to  be  given  up 
except  on  the  most  distinct  counter  arguments.  (2)  Sub-Jlnal,  occa- 
sionally, especially  after  verbs  of  entreaty  (not  of  command),  the 
subject  of  the  prayer  being  blended  with,  and  even  in  some  cases 
obscuring,  the  purpose  of  making  it.  (3)  Eventual,  or  indicative  of 
result,  apparently  in  a  fcAV  cases,  and  due,  perhaps,  more  to  what 
is  called  'Hebrew  teleology'  (i.  e.,  the  reverential  aspect  under 
which  the  Jews  regarded  prophecy  and  its  fulfilment)  than  gram- 
matical depravation."  * 

'  Biblical  Repository  for  Jan.,  1835,  p.  105. 

-  Critical  Commentary  on  Mark  xi,  25. 

^  Comp.  Winer's  New  Testament  Grammar  (English  translation,  Andover,  1874),  pp. 
457-461,  and  Buttmann's  Grammar  of  tlie  New  Testament  Greek  (English  translation, 
Andover,  1873),  pp.  23.5-241. 

■*  Critical  and  Grammatical  Commentary  on  Ephesians  i,  17. 


508  PRINCIPLES  OF 

But  when  the  words  'iva  TiX-qpco-dx}  are  used  in  connexion  with  the 
Iva  teiic  in  fulfilment  of  prophecy  we  should  not  hesitate  to  accept 
formulas  of  ^Yiq  telic  forcc  of  'Iva.  The  Scriptures  themselves  recog- 
tion.  nise  a  sort  of  divine  necessity  for  the  fulfilment  of  all 

that  predicted  or  typified  the  Christ.  As  it  was  necessary  (Met) 
for  the  Christ  to  suffer  (Luke  xxiv,  26),  so  "  it  was  necessary  that 
all  thin<>"s  which  were  written  in  the  law  of  Moses,  and  the  Prophets, 
and  the  Psalms  concerning  him  should  be  fulfilled"  (Luke  xxiv,  44; 
comp.  the  edei  'nXT]Q(jj-&r]vai  of  Acts  i,  16).  The  objection  that  it  is 
absurd  to  suppose  all  these  things  were  done  merely  to  fulfil  a 
prophecy  is  based  upon  a  misconception  and  misrepresentation  of  the 
evangelist.  The  statement  that  this  jiarticular  divine  purpose  was 
served  does  not  imply  that  no  other  divine  purpose  was  accom- 
plished. "  All  these  things  did  transpire,"  says  Whedon,  "  in  order, 
among  other  purposes,  to  the  fulfilment  of  that  prophecy,  inasmuch 
as  the  fulfilment  of  that  prophecy  was  at  the  same  time  the  accom- 
plishment of  the  Incarnation  of  the  Redeemer,  and  the  verification 
of  the  divine  prediction.  Nor  is  there  any  predestinarian  fatalism 
in  all  this.  God  pi-edicts  what  he  foresees  that  men  will  freely  do; 
and  then  men  do  freely  in  turn  fulfil  what  God  predicts,  and  so  un- 
consciously act  in  order  to  verify  God's  veracity.  Moreover  there 
is  no  fatalism  in  supposing  that  God  has  high  plans  which  he  does 
with  infinite  wisdom  cai-ry  out  through  the  free,  unnecessitated, 
though  foreseen  wills  of  men.  Such  is  his  inconceivable  wisdom 
that  he  can  so  place  free  agents  in  a  free  system  of  probation  that 
which  ever  way  they  freely  turn  they  will  but  further  his  great 
generic  plans  and  verify  liis  foreknowledge.  So  that  it  may,  in  a 
right  sense,  be  true  that  all  these  things  are  done  by  free  agents  in 
order  to  so  desirable  an  end  as  to  fulfil  the  divine  foresight." ' 

The  passage  in  Matt,  ii,  15,  has  been  thought  by  many  to  be  a 
„         .  ,        certain  instance  of  the  ecbatic  usage  of  Iva.     It  is  there 

Hosea  xi,  1,  as  ,  ^  ^ 

cited  in  Matt,   written  that  Joseph  arose  and  took  the  child  Jesus  and 
'  '^"  his  mother  by  night  and  withdrew  into  Egypt,  and  was 

there  until  the  death  of  Herod,  "  in  order  that  (iVa  7TA7/pwi9f/)  it 
might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  the  Lord  through  the 
prophet,  saying.  Out  of  Egypt  I  called  my  son."  The  quotation  is 
a  literal  translation  of  the  Hebrew  of  IIos  xi,  1,  and  the  reference 
of  the  prophet  is  to  Israel.  The  whole  verse  of  Hos.  xi,  1,  reads 
thus:  "For  a  child  was  Israel,  and  I  loved  him,  and  out  of  Egypt  I 
called  my  son."  Here  some  would  see  a  double  sense  of  prophecy, 
and  others  an  Old  Testament  text  accommodated  to  a  New  Testa- 
ment use.     But  the  true  interpretation  of  (his  quotation  will  recog- 

'  Commentary  on  Matthew  i,  22. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  509 

nise  the  typical  character  of  Israel  as  "  God's  firstborn,"  a  familiar 
tliought  of  the  Old  Testament  Scripture.  Thus,  in  Exod,  iv,  22 
Jehovah  is  represented  as  saying:  "My  son,  my  firstborn,  is  Israel." 
And  again  in  Jer.  xxxi,  9:  "For  I  have  been  to  Israel  for  a  father, 
and  Ephraim  is  my  firstborn."  Compare  also  Isa.  xlix,  3.  Recog- 
nising this  typical  character  of  Israel  as  God's  firstborn  son,  the 
evangelist  readily  j)erceived  that  the  ancient  exodus  of  Israel  out 
of  Egypt  was  a  type  of  this  event  in  the  life  of  the  Son  of  God 
wliile  he  was  yet  a  child.  Among  the  other  purposes  (and  there 
were  doubtless  many)  that  were  served  by  this  going  down  into 
Egypt,  and  exodus  therefrom,  was  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  of 
Hosea.  This  fulfilment  of  typical  events,  as  we  have  shown  above 
(p.  494),  does  not  authorize  the  doctrine  of  a  double  sense  in  the 
language  of  prophecy.  The  words  of  Hosea  xi,  1,  have  but  one 
meaning,  and  announce  in  poetic  form  a  fact  of  Israel's  ancient  his- 
tory. That  fact  was  a  type  which  was  fulfilled  in  the  event  re- 
corded in  Matt,  ii,  but  the  language  used  by  the  prophet  had  no 
previous  fulfilment.  It  was  not  a  prediction  at  all,  but  an  allusion 
to  an  event  which  occured  six  hundred  years  before  Hosea  was  born.* 
III.  It  remains  to  notice  the  purposes  for  which  any  of  the  sacred 
writers  quoted  or  referred  to  the  more  ancient  Scrip-   „ 

^  ,  .  .  .  .  fPurposesof 

tures.     Attention  to  this  point  will  be  an  important  aid   scripture  quo- 
in enabling  us  to  understand  and  appreciate  the  various  '^'^^°°- 
uses  of  the  holy  writings. 

1.  The  citation  of  many  ancient  prophecies  was  manifestly  for 
the  purpose  of  showing  and  putting  on  record  their  fulfilment. 
This  is  true  of  all  the  prophecies  which  are  introduced  with  the 
formula  Iva  7r/L?/pwi9^,  in  order  that  it  might  be  fulfilled.  And  the 
same  thought  is  implied  in  the  context  of  quotations  introduced  by 

^Lange  (Commentary  on  Matthew  ii,  15)  has  the  following:  "As  the  flight  and  the 
return  had  really  taken  place,  the  evangelist,  whose  attention  was  always  directed  to 
the  fulfilment  of  prophecy,  might  very  properly  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  even 
this  prediction  of  Hosea  had  been  fulfilled.  And,  in  truth,  viewed  not  as  a  verbal 
but  as  a  typical  prophecy,  this  prediction  was  fulfilled  by  this  flight  into  Egypt.  Is- 
rael of  old  was  called  out  of  Egypt  as  the  son  of  God,  inasmuch  as  Israel  was  identi- 
fied with  the  Son  of  God.  But  now  the  Son  of  God  himself  was  called  out  of  Egypt, 
who  came  out  of  Israel,  as  the  kernel  from  the  husk.  When  the  Lord  called  Israel 
out  of  Egypt,  it  was  with  special  reference  to  his  Son ;  that  is,  in  view  of  the  high 
spiritual  place  which  Israel  was  destined  to  occupy.  In  connexion  with  this  it  is  also 
important  to  bear  in  mind  the  historical  influence  of  Egypt  on  the  world  at  large. 
Ancient  Greek  civilization — nay,  in  a  certain  sense,  the  imperial  power  of  Rome  itself 
— sprung  from  Egypt ;  in  Egypt  the  science  of  Christian  theology  originated  ;  from 
Egypt  proceeded  the  last  universal  Conqueror ;  out  of  Egypt  came  the  typical  son  of 
God  to  found  the  theocracy ;  and  thence  also  the  true  Son  of  God  to  complete  the 
theocracy." 


510  PRINCIPLES   OF 

other  formulas.  These  facts  exhibit  the  interdependence  and  or- 
orauic  connexion  of  the  entire  body  of  Holy  Scripture.  It  is  a 
divinely  constructed  whole,  and  the  essential  relations  of  its  several 
parts  must  never  be  forgotten. 

2.  Other  (quotations  are  made  for  the  purpose  of  establishing  a 
doctrine.  So  Paul,  in  Rom.  iii,  ^)-19,  quotes  the  Scriptures  to  prove 
the  universal  depravity  of  man;  and  in  Rom.  iv,  3,  he  cites  the 
record  of  Abraham's  belief  in  God  to  show  that  a  man  is  justified 
by  faith  rather  than  works,  and  that  faith  is  imputed  unto  him  for 
righteousness.  This  manner  of  his  using  the  Old  Testament  obvi- 
ously implies  that  the  apostle  and  his  readers  regarded  it  as  author- 
itative in  its  teachings.  What  was  written  therein,  or  could  be 
confirmed  thereby,  was  final,  and  must  be  accepted  as  the  revela- 
tion of  God. 

3.  Sometimes  the  Scripture  is  quoted  for  the  purpose  of  confut- 
ing and  rebuking  opponents  and  unbelievers.  Jesus  himself  ap- 
pealed to  his  Jewish  opponents  on  the  ground  of  their  regard  for 
the  Scriptures,  and  showed  their  inconsistency  in  refusing  to  receive 
him  of  wliom  the  Scriptui'es  so  abundantly  testified  (John  v,  39,  40). 
With  those  who  accepted  the  Scripture  as  the  word  of  God  such 
argumentation  was  of  great  weight.  How  effectually  Jesus  em- 
ployed it  may  be  seen  in  his  answers  to  the  Sadducees  and  Phari- 
sees (Matt,  xxii,  29-32,  41-46).     Compare  John  x,  34-36. 

4.  Finally,  the  Scriptui'es  Avere  cited  or  referred  to  in  a  general 
way  as  a  book  of  divine  authority,  for  rhetorical  purposes,  and  for 
illustration.  Its  manifold  treasures  were  the  heritage  of  the  people 
of  God.  Its  language  would  be  naturally  ajjpropriated  to  express 
any  thought  or  idea  which  a  writer  or  speaker  might  wish  to  clothe 
in  sacred  and  venerable  form.  Hence  the  manners,  references,  allu- 
sions, and  citations  which  serve  mainly  to  enhance  the  force  or 
beauty  of  a  statement,  and  to  illustrate  some  argument  or  appeal. 
"  The  writings  of  the  Jewish  prophets,"  says  Home,  "  which 
abound  in  fine  descriptions,  poetical  images,  and  sublime  diction, 
were  the  classics  of  the  later  Jews;  and,  in  subsequent  ages,  all 
their  writers  affected  allusions  to  them,  borrowed  their  images  and 
descriptions,  and  very  often  cited  their  identical  words  when  re- 
cording any  event  or  circumstance  that  happened  in  the  history  of 
ihe  persons  whose  lives  they  were  relating,  provided  it  was  similar 
and  parallel  to  one  that  occurred  at  the  times,  and  was  described  in 
the  books,  of  the  ancient  prophets."  * 

'  Introduction  to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  vol.  ii,  p.  191.  , 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  511 


CHAPTER  XXIX. 

THE  FALSE  AND  THE  TRUE  ACCOMMODATION. 

Inasmuch  as  many  passages  of  the  Old  Testament  Scripture  are 
appropriated  by  New  Testament  writers  for  the  sake  of  The  rationaiis- 
illustration,  or  by  way  of  special  application,  it  has  been  "'^  tiieory 
held  by  many  that  all  the  Old  Testament  quotations,  even  the  Mes- 
sianic prophecies,  have  been  applied  in  the  New  Testament  in  a 
sense  differing  more  or  less  widely  from  their  original  import. 
This  especially  has  been  a  position  taken  by  many  rationalists  of 
Germany,  and  some  have  gone  so  far  as  to  teach  that  our  Lord  ac- 
commodated himself  to  the  prejudices  of  his  age  and  people.  His 
use  of  Scripture,  they  tell  us,  was  of  the  nature  of  argument  and 
appeal  ad  hominem  y  even  his  words  and  acts  in  regard  to  unclean 
spirits  of  demons,  and  other  matters  of  belief  among  the  Jews, 
were  a  falling  in  line  with  the  errors  and  superstitions  of  the  com- 
mon people. 

Such  a  theory  of  accommodation  should  be  utterly  repudiated  by 
the  sober  and  thoughtful  exegete.  It  virtually  teaches  should  be  repu- 
that  Jesus  Christ  was  a  propagator  of  falsehood.  It  ^lated. 
would  convict  every  New  Testament  writer  of  a  species  of  mental 
and  religious  delusion.  The  divine  Teacher  did,  indeed,  accommo- 
date his  teaching  to  the  capacity  of  his  hearers,  as  every  wise 
teacher  will  do ;  or,  rather,  he  condescended  to  put  himself  on  the 
plane  of  their  limited  knowledge.  He  would  speak  so  that  men 
might  understand,  and  believe,  and  be  saved.  But  in  those  who 
had  no  disposition  to  search  and  test  his  truth  he  declared  that 
Isaiah's  Avords  (Isa.  vi,  9,  10)  received  a  new  application,  and  a  most 
significant  fullilment  (Matt,  xiii,  14,  15).  And  this  was  strictly 
true.  Isaiah's  words  were  first  spoken  to  the  dull  and  blinded  hearts 
of  the  Israel  of  his  own  day.  Ezekiel  repeated  them  with  equal 
propriety  to  the  Israel  of  a  later  generation  (Ezek,  xii,  2).  And 
our  Lord  quoted  and  applied  them  to  the  Israel  of  his  time  as  one 
of  those  homiletic  Scriptures  which  are  fulfilled  again  and  again  in 
human  history  when  the  faculties  of  spiritual  perception  become 
perversely  dull  to  the  truths  of  God.  The  prophecy  in  question 
was  not  the  prediction  of  a  specific  event,  but  a  general  oracle  of 
God,  and  of  such  a  nature  as  to  be  capable  of  repeated  fulfilments. 


m2  PRINCIPLES   OF 

Hence  such  prophecies  afford  no  proof  of  a  double  sense.  The 
sense  is  in  each  instance  simple  and  direct,  but  the  language  is 
capable  of  double  or  manifold  applications. 

And  herein  we  observe  a  true  sense  in  which  the  words  of  Scrip- 
ture may  be  accommodated  to  particular  occasions  and 

Thp  tniG  IdcSf  • 

of  accomnioda-  purposes.  It  is  found  in  the  manifold  uses  and  applica- 
"°°-  tions  of  which  the  words  of  divine  inspiration  are  capa- 

ble. This  is  not,  strictly  speaking,  a  manifold  fulfilment  of  Scrip- 
ture, though  it  may  be  affirmed  that  a  forcible  and  legitimate 
application  of  a  passage  is  truly  a  fulfilment  of  it.  When  a  given 
passage  is  of  such  a  character  as  to  be  susceptible  of  application  to 
other  circumstances  or  subjects  than  those  to  which  it  first  apjjlied, 
such  secondary  application  should  not  be  denied  the  name  of  a  ful- 
filment. In  such  a  case  we  do  not  say:  The  first  reference  was  to 
an  event  near  at  hand,  but  that  primary  fulfilment  did  not  exhaust 
the  meaning;  its  higher  fulfilment  is  to  be  seen  in  a  future  event. 
Much  truth  may  attach  to  such  a  statement,  but  it  is  liable  io  mis- 
lead one,  and  to  foster  the  idea  of  a  hidden  sense,  a  mystic  mean- 
ing, a  so-called  hyponoia  (vnovoia).  Thus  the  psalmist  says:  "I 
will  open  my  mouth  in  a  parable;  I  will  utter  dark  sayings  of  old" 
(Psa.  Ixxviii,  2).  This  is  quoted  by  Matthew  (xiii,  35),  the  first 
sentence  according  to  the  Septuagint,  the  second  a  free  rendering 
of  the  Hebrew,  but  following  strictly  neither  the  Hebrew  nor  the 
Septuagint.  The  evangelist  aftirms  that  Jesus  made  use  of  parables 
in  order  that  these  words  might  be  fulfilled.  And  we  are  not  at 
liberty  to  deny  that  this  was  one  real  purpose  of  Jesus  in  the  use  of 
parables.  The  words  of  the  psalmist  prophet  herein  found  a  new 
and  higher  application,  but  in  no  different  sense  than  that  in  which 
they  were  first  used. 

The  language  of  Jer.  xxxi,  15,  is  quoted  by  Matthew  (ii,  17,  18) 

as  being  fulfilled  in  the  weepinor  and  lamentation  occa- 
Jer.  xxxl,  lo,  as  =>  r      o  t>     i  i 

citea  in  Matt,   sioned  by  Herod's  slaughter  of  the  infants  of  Bethle- 

11, 1',  18.  hem.     In  the  highest  strain  of  poetical  conception  the 

prophet  Jeremiah  sets  forth  the  grief  of  Israel's  woes  and  exile.  It 
seems  to  him  as  if  the  affectionate  Rachel — the  mother  of  the  house 
of  Joseph,  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  (Gen.  xxx,  24;  xli,  51,  52),  and 
the  mother  of  Benjamin  (Gen.  xxxv,  16-18),  might  be  heai'd  weep- 
ing and  wailing  at  Ramah  over  the  loss  of  her  children.  The 
prophet  mentions  Ephraim  (Jer.  xxxi,  18,  20)  as  the  chief  tribe  and 
representative  of  all  Israel.  The  tender  mother's  agony  is  over  a 
wider  woe  than  the  exile  of  Judah  only.  It  takes  in  Ephraim's 
overthrow  and  captivity  as  well.  And  Rachel,  rather  than  Leah,  is 
named  because  of  her  great  desire  for  children  (Gen.  xxx,  1),  and 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  513 

the  touching  and  melancholy  cn-cumstances  of  her  death  (Gen. 
XXXV,  18).  The  weeping  is  represented  as  heard  at  Ramah,  perhaps 
for  various  reasons.  That  city  occupied  a  conspicuous  eminence  ' 
in  the  tribe-territory  of  Benjamin,  whence  the  lamentation  might 
be  conceived  as  sounding  far  and  wide  through  all  the  coasts  of 
Benjamin  and  Judah.''  Ramah  was  the  home  of  Hannah  (the 
mother  of  Samuel,  1  Sam.  i,  19,  20),  whose  motherly  yearning  was 
so  much  like  that  of  Rachel.'  It  was  at  Ramah  also  ^^•here  the  Jew- 
ish exiles  were  gathered  before  their  deportation  to  Babylon  (Jer. 
xl,  1).  The  heart  of  Rachel,  in  the  j)rophet's  view,  was  large 
enough  to  feel  and  lament  the  woes  of  all  the  sons  of  Jacob.  All 
this  comes  up  to  the  evangelist  when  he  pens  the  slaughter  of  the 
children  of  the  coasts  of  Bethlehem  (Matt,  ii,  16).  It  seems  to  him 
as  if  the  motherly  heart  of  Rachel  cried  from  the  tomb  again,  and 
this  later  sorrow  was  but  a  repetition  of  that  of  the  exile,  the  for- 
mer sorrow  being  a  type  of  the  latter.  And  this  was  a  fulfilment 
of  that  poetic  prophecy,  although  it  is  not  said  that  this  sorrow  of 
Bethlehem  came  to  pass  in  order  to  fulfil  the  words  of  Jeremiah. 
By  a  true  and  legitimate  accommodation  the  words  of  the  prophet 
were  appropriated  by  the  evangelist  as  enhancing  his  record  of  that 
bitter  woe.  "  By  keeping  in  mind,"  says  Davidson,  "  the  close  re- 
lation of  type  and  antitype,  whether  the  former  be  a  person,  as  Da- 
vid, or  an  event,  as  the  birth  of  a  child,  we  shall  not  stumble  at  the 
manner  in  which  certain  quotations  in  the  New  Testament  are  in- 
troduced, nor  have  recourse  to  other  modes  of  explanation  which 
seem  to  be  objectionable.  We  do  not  adopt,  with  some,  the  hy- 
pothesis of  a  double  sense,  to  which  there  are  weighty  objections. 
Neither  do  we  conceive  that  the  principle  of  accommodation,  in  its 
mildest  form,  comes  up  to  the  truth.  The  passages  containing  typ- 
ical prophecies  have  always  a  direct  reference  to  facts  or  things  in 
the  history  of  the  persons  or  people  obviously  spoken  of  in  the  con- 
text. But  these  facts  or  circumstances  were  typical  of  spiritual 
transactions  in  the  history  of  the  Saviour  and  his  kingdom."  ^ 

'  Robinson's  Biblical  Researches,  vol.  i,  p.  576. 

^  Conip.  Keil,  Commentary  on  Jeremiah  xxxi,  15. 

' "  The  prophet  goes  back  in  spirit,"  says  Nagelsbach,  "  to  the  time  when  the  in- 
habitants of  the  kingdom  of  the  ten  tribes  were  led  away  to  Assyria  into  captivity. 
.  .  .  The  mother  of  the  ruling  tribe  appears  thus  as  the  personification  of  the  king- 
dom ruled  by  it.  The  spirit  of  Rachel  is  the  genius  of  the  kingdom  of  the  ten  tribes 
whom  the  prophet  represented  by  a  bold  poetical  figure  as  rising  from  her  tomb  by 
night  and  bewailing  the  misery  of  her  children." — Commentary  on  Jeremiah  xxxi,  15. 

*  Sacred  Hermeneutics,  p.  488. 
33 


514  PIILN'CIPLES  OF 


CHAPTER  XXX. 

ALLEGED    DISCREPANCIES    OP    THE    SCRIPTURES. 

In  comparing  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  and 
,    ^       also  in  examininsc  the  statements  of  the  different  writers 

General    char-  ° 

acterofthedis-  of  either  Testament,  the  reader's  attention  is  occasion- 
crepancies.  ^||y.  j^^rested  by  what  appear  to  be  contradictions. 
Sometimes  different  passages  of  the  same  book  present  some  notice- 
able inconsistency,  but  more  frequently  the  statements  made  by 
different  writers  exhibit  discrepancies  which  some  critics  have  been 
hasty  to  pronounce  irreconcilable.  These  discrepancies  are  found 
in  the  genealogical  tables,  and  in  various  numerical,  historical,  doc- 
trinal, ethical,  and  prophetical  statements.  It  is  the  province  of 
the  interpreter  of  Scripture  to  examine  these  with  great  patience 
and  care;  he  must  not  ignore  any  difficulty,  but  should  be  able  to 
explain  the  apparent  inconsistencies,  not  by  dogmatic  assertions  or 
denials,  but  by  rational  methods  of  procedure.  If  he  find  a  dis- 
crepancy or  a  contradiction  which  he  is  unable  to  explain  he  should 
not  hesitate  to  acknowledge  it.  It  does  not  follow  that  because  he 
is  not  able  to  solve  the  problem  it  is  therefore  insoluble.  The  lack 
of  sufficient  data  has  often  effectually  baffled  the  efforts  of  the  most 
able  and  accomplished  exegetes. 

A  large  proportion  of  the  discrepancies  of  the  Bible  are  traceable 
Causes  of  the  to  one  or  more  of  the  following  causes:  The  errors  of 
discrepancies,  copyists  in  the  manuscripts;  the  variety  of  names  ap- 
plied to  the  same  person  or  place;  different  methods  of  reckoning 
times  and  seasons;  different  local  and  historical  standpoints;  and 
the  special  scope  and  plan  of  each  particular  book.  Variations  are 
not  contradictions,  and  many  essential  variations  arise  from  differ- 
ent methods  of  arranging  a  series  of  particular  facts.  The  peculi- 
arities of  oriental  thought  and  speech  often  involve  seeming  extrav- 
agance of  statement  and  verbal  inaccuracies,  which  are  of  a  nature 
to  provoke  the  criticism  of  the  less  impassioned  writers  of  the  West. 
And  it  is  but  just  to  add  that  not  a  few  of  the  alleged  contradic- 
tions of  Scripture  exist  only  in  the  imagination  of  sceptical  writers, 
and  are  to  be  attributed  to  the  perverse  misunderstanding  of  cap- 
tious critics. 

It   is   easy  to   perceive   how,  in  the  course  of  ages,  numerous 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  515 

little  errors  and  discrepancies  would  be  likely  to  find  their  way  into 

the  text  by  reason  of  the  oversight  or  carelessness  of     Discrepancies 

transcribers.     To  this  cause  we  attribute  many  of  the     ansinfr  from 

''  errors  of  copy- 

variations  in  orthography  and  in  numerical  statements,     ists. 

The  habit  of  expressing  numbers  by  letters,  several  of  which  closely 
resemble  each  othei-,  was  liable  to  occasion  many  discrepancies. 
Sometimes  the  omission  of  a  letter  or  a  word  occasions  a  difficulty 
which  cannot  now  be  removed.  Thus  the  only  proper  rendering  of 
the  present  Hebrew  text  of  1  Sam,  xiii,  1,  is,  "  Saul  was  a  year  old 
(Hebrew,  son  of  a  year)  when  he  began  to  reign,  and  two  years  he 
reigned  over  Israel."  The  writer  is  here  evidently  following  the 
custom  exhibited  in  2  Sam.  ii,  10;  v,  4;  1  Kings  xiv,  21;  xxii,  42; 
2  Kings  viii,  26,  of  opening  his  account  of  a  king's  reign  with  a  for- 
mal statement  of  his  age  when  he  became  king,  and  of  the  number 
of  years  that  he  reigned.  But  the  numbers  have  been  lost  from 
the  text,  and  the  omission  is  older  than  the  Septuagint  version 
which  follows  our  present  corrupt  Hebrew  text.  The  following 
form  may  best  present  the  passage  with  its  omissions:  "Saul  was 

years  old  when  he  began  to  reign,  and  he  reigned and 

two  years  over  Israel."  These  omissions  can  now  be  supplied  only 
by  conjecture.  It  is  evident  that  Saul  was  more  than  a  year  old 
when  he  began  to  reign,  and  that  he  reigned  more  than  two  years. 
According  to  Acts  xiii,  21,  and  Josephus  (Ant.,  vi,  14,  9)  he  reigned 
forty  years,  but  this  may  include  the  seven  years  and  a  half  as- 
sumed to  have  passed  between  the  death  of  Saul  and  that  of  Ish- 
bosheth  (2  Sam.  ii,  11).  Ishbosheth,  however,  is  said  to  have  reigned 
but  two  years  (2  Sam.  ii,  10).  The  language  of  Paul  and  Josephus 
more  likely  expresses  a  current  Jewish  tradition  which  was  not  exact. 
A  comparison  of  genealogical  tables  often  exhibits  discrepancies 
in  names  and  numbers.     But  the  transcription  and  repe-     ^. 

•',_•'  Discrepancies 

tition  of  such  records  through  a  long  period  of  time,  in  peneaiogi- 
and  by  many  different  scribes,  would  naturally  expose  ^^^  tables. 
them  to  numerous  variations.  A  comparison  of  the  family  record 
of  Jacob  and  his  sons,  the  seventy  souls  that  came  into  Egypt 
(Gen.  xlvi),  with  that  of  the  census  of  these  families  in  the  time  of 
Moses  (Num.  xxvi)  will  serve  to  illustrate  the  peculiarities  of  He- 
brew genealogies.  We  give  these  lists,  on  the  adjoining  page,  in 
parallel  columns,  and  also  select  from  the  lists  in  1  Chron.  ii-viii 
the  corresponding  names,  so  far  as  they  appear  there,  that  the 
reader  may  see  at  a  glance  the  variations  in  orthography.  For 
convenience  of  reference  we  place  the  corresponding  names  oppo- 
site each  other;  but  the  student  should  note  the  variations  in  the 
order   of  names  as   they  appear  in  these  different  lists.     The  list 


516  PRINCIPLES   OF 

in  Genesis  is  arranged  accordino-  to  the  wives  and  concubines  of 
Jacob's  famuy  Jacob.  The  first  thirty-three  include  Jacob  and  the 
record.  gons  and  daughter  of  Leah;  the  next  sixteen  are  the 

sons  of  Zilpah;  the  next  fourteen  are  the  sons  of  Rachel;  and  the 
remaining  seven  are  the  sons  of  Bilhah.  It  is  a  manifest  purpose 
to  make  the  list  number  "  seventy  souls."  In  Num.  xxvi  the  order 
of  names  follows  no  apparent  plan.' 

Gen.  xlvi.  Num.  ixvi.  1  Cairon.  ii-viii. 

1.  JACOB. 

2.  Reuben Reuben Rexiben. 

3.  Hanoch Hanoch Hanoch. 

4.  Phallua Phallua Phallua. 

(Descendants.) 

5.  Hezron Hezron Hezron. 

6.  Carmi Carmi Carmi. 

7.  Simeon Simeon Simeon. 

8.  Jemuel *  Nemuel *  Neumel. 

9.  Jauiin Jamin Jamin. 

10.  Ohad 

11.  Jachin Jacliin *  Jarib. 

12.  Zohar *  Zerah *  Zerah. 

13.  Shaul Shaul Shaul. 

14.  Levi Levi Levi. 

15.  Gershon Gershon *  Gershom. 

(Descendants.) 

16.  Kohath Koliath Kohath, 

17.  Mcrari Meiaii Merari. 

(Descendants.) 

18.  JUDAH JUDAII JUDAH. 

19.  Er.    Hezron Er.    Hezron Er.    Hezron. 

20.  Onan.    Hamul   Onan.    Hamul Onan.   HamuL 

21.  Shelah Shelah Shelah. 

22.  Pherez Pherez Pherez. 

23.  Zerah Zerah Zerah. 

24.  ISSACHAR ISSACHAR ISS.\CHAR. 

25.  Tola Tola Tola. 

26.  Phuvah Pliuvah *  Phuah. 

27.  Job *  Jashub *  Jashib. 

28.  Shimron Sluimon Sliimron. 

29.  Zebulun Zebulun Zebulun. 

30.  Sered Sered l-^-ri 

31.  Elon Elon    [Il 

32.  Jahleel Jahleel (  ^c  ^ 

33.  Dinah — j  ^  ^"3 

'  The  names  of  the  tribes,  or  tribe-fathers,  are  frequently  written,  but  in  no  two 
places  do  tliey  stand  in  the  same  order.  Comp.  Gen.  xxix,  .S2-xxx,  "Jt ;  xlix;  E.\od. 
i,  1-5;  Num.  i,  5-15  and  20-47;  .xiii,  1-10;  xxxiv,  17-28;  Deut.  xxxiii. 


CO 

eo 


O 


=3    > 
■a   m 

o  a^ 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  517 

Gen.  xlvi.  Nvun.  xxvi.  1  Cliron.  ii-viii. 

34.  Gad Gad Gad. 

35.  Ziphion *  Zephon 

36.  Haggi Haggi 

37.  Shuni  Shuni 

38.  Ezbon *  Ozni 

39.  Eri Eri 

40.  Arodi  *  Arod 

41.  Areli Areli  

42.  ASHER ASHER ASHER. 

43.  Jimnah Jimnah Jimnah. 

44.  Jishvah  Jishvah. 

45.  Jishvi Jishvi Jishvi. 

46.  Beiiali Beiiah Beriali. 

47.  Seruh Serah Serah, 

48.  Heber Heber Heber. 

49.  Malchiel Malchiel Malchiel. 

50.  Joseph    Joseph Joseph. 

51.  Manasseh Manasseh Manasseh. 

(Descendants.) 

52.  Ephraim Ephraim Ephraim. 

(Descendants.) 

53.  Benjamin Bekjamin  ...    Benjamin. 

54.  Bela Bela Bela, 

55.  Becher .  .  (Comp.  Heb.  text  of  1  Chron.  viii,  1.) 

56.  Aslibel Ashbel Ashljel. 

57.  Gera Gera. 

58.  Naaman Naaman Naaman. 

59.  Ehi *  Ahiram *  Aharah. 

60.  Rosh  . ." 

61.  Jluppim Sbesbupbam Shephuphan. 

62.  Hiippiin *  Hupbain 

63.  Aid Ard * Addar. 

64.  Dan Dan Dan. 

65.  Husbim   *  Shubara 

66.  Naphtali .Naphtali  Naphtali. 

67.  Jabzeel Jabzeel *  JahzieeL 

68.  Guni Guiii Guni. 

69.  Jezer Jezer Jezer. 

70.  Sbillem Shillem *  Sballum. 

*  The  asterisk  is  designed  to  call  attention  to  several  variations  in  orthography ;  the  small 
capitals  designate  the  tribe-fathers;  names  in  Mack  letter  are  supposed  levirate  substitutions  of 
grandchildren;  and  the  word  (descendants)  stands  in  place  of  names  given  in  the  Scripture 
record,  but  for  want  of  room  not  printed  above. 

In  studying  these  lists  of  names,  it  is  important  to  attend  to  the 
historical  position  and  purpose  of   each  writer.       The    Historical 
list  of  Gen.  xlvi  was  probably  prepared  in  Egypt,  some    standpoint. 
time  after  the  migration  of  Jacob  and  his  family  thither.     It  was 


518  PRINCIPLES   OP 

probably  prepared,  in  the  form  in  which  it  there  stands,  by  the 
sanction  of  Jacob  himself.'  The  aged  and  chastened  patriarch 
went  down  into  Egypt  with  the  divine  assurance  that  God  would 
make  him  a  great  nation,  and  bring  him  up  again  (Gen.  xlvi,  3,  4). 
Great  interest  therefore  would  attach  to  his  family  register,  as  it 
was  made  out  under  his  own  direction.  But  at  the  time  of  the 
census  of  Num.  xxvi,  whilst  the  names  of  the  heads  of  families  are 
all  carefully  preserved,  they  have  become  differently  arranged,  and 
other  names  have  become  prominent.  Numerous  later  descendants 
have  become  historically  conspicuous,  and  are  accordingly  added 
under  the  proper  family  heads.  The  tables  given  in  1  Chron.  i-ix 
show  much  more  extensive  additions  and  changes.  The  peculiar 
differences  between  the  lists  show  that  one  has  not  been  copied 
from  the  other ;  nor  were  both  taken  from  a  common  source.  They 
were  evidently  prepared  independently,  each  from  a  different  stand- 
point, and  for  a  definite  jDurpose. 

We  should  notice  also  the  peculiar  Hebrew  methods  of  thought 
and  expression  as  exhibited  in  the  ancient  list  of  Gen.  xlvi.  In 
Hebrew  style  verses  8  and  15  Jacob  is  included  among  his  own  sons, 
and  usage.  and  the  immortal  thirty-three,  which  includes  the  father 
and  one  daughter,  and  two  great-grandsons  (Hezron  and  Ilamul) 
probably  not  yet  born  when  Jacob  moved  into  Egypt,  are  dcsig- 

'  The  following  suggestive  observations  of  Dr.  Mahan,  in  his  little  work  entitled 
"The  Spiritual  Point  of  View;  An  Answer  to  Bishop  Colenso"  (New  York,  1803, 
pp.  57,  58),  illustrate  how  many  considerations  and  circumstances  may  have  naturally 
influenced  in  the  preparation  of  this  genealogy.  "  Jacob's  family  list,  whether  written 
in  any  way  or  merely  connnitted  to  memory,  contained  before  he  went  into  Egypt  pre- 
cisely seventy  souls ;  though  four  of  these,  namely,  his  two  wives  and  two  of  the  sons 
of  Judah,  were  souls  of  the  departed.  Thus,  arithmetically,  and  in  a  matter-of-fact 
way,  Jacob  had  sixty-six  in  his  company  when  he  first  settled  in  Egypt ;  but  religious- 
ly, or,  as  some  might  say,  poetically — in  the  spirit  of  the  little  maid  of  Wordsworth's 
ballad,  who  insisted  so  strenuously  'we  are  seven' — he  might  still  count  them  seventy. 
To  this  fact  may  be  added  the  following  probabilities :  When  Jacob  arrived  in  Egypt 
he  probably  gave  to  his  list  the  title  or  heading  which  it  still  bears,  namely,  The 
names  of  the  children  of  Israel  which  came  with  him  into  Egypt.  And  it  is  likely 
enough  that  he  did  this  without  troubling  himself  to  erase,  either  from  the  tablets  or 
his  memory,  the  names  of  the  dear  departed  souls  whom  the  kind-hearted  and  faithful 
patriarch  still  regarded  as  'of  his  company.'  At  a  later  date,  however,  he  may  have 
revised  his  list.  Affectionate  heads  of  families  are  apt  to  do  such  things.  Their 
family  list  is  the  solace  of  their  old  age ;  and  they  turn  it  over  and  over  as  fondly  as 
a  miser  counts  over  his  hoarded  money.  The  patriarch,  then,  turning  his  list  over  in 
this  way,  and  counting  his  seventy  souls  which  the  Lord  had  given  him,  and  reluctant 
to  erase  his  four  departed  souls,  availed  himself  of  the  first  opportunity  to  substitute 
for  them  four  new  souls — among  his  great-grandchildren — whom  the  Lord  had  granted 
him  in  their  place.  Thus  the  names  of  the  grandchildren  of  Judah  and  Asher  may 
easily  have  come  in.     No  other  names  were  added,  because  no  others  were  needed." 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  519 

Dated  as  "  all  the  souls  of  his  sons  and  his  daughters."  Similar 
usage  appears  in  Exod.  i,  5,  where  it  is  said  that  "  all  the  souls  that 
came  out  of  the  loins  of  Jacob  were  seventy  souls."  *  The  writer  has 
in  mind  the  memorable  "  seventy "  that  came  into  Egypt  (comp. 
Deut.  X,  22).  In  Gen.  xlvi,  27,  the  two  sons  of  Joseph,  who  are 
expressly  said  to  have  been  "  born  to  him  in  Egypt,"  are  reckoned 
among  the  seventy  who  "  came  into  Egypt."  It  is  a  carping  and 
captious  criticism  which  fastens  upon  peculiarities  of  Hebrew  usus 
loquendi  like  these,  and  pronounces  them  "  remarkable  contradic- 
tions, involving  such  plain  impossibilities  that  they  cannot  be  re- 
garded as  true  narratives  of  actual  historical  matters  of  fact."  '^ 

The  probable  reason  for  reckoning  Hezron  and  Hamid  (verse  12) 
among  the  seventy  was  that  they  were  adopted  by  Judah  in  the 
places  of  the  deceased  Er  and  Onan,  who  died  in  the  land  of  Canaan. 
This  ai^pears  from  the  fact  that  in  the  later  registers  of  Num.  xxvi 
and  1  Chron.  ii  they  appear  as  permanent  heads  of  families  in  Judah. 
Heber  and  Malchiel,  grandsons  of  Asher  (ver.  17),  are  also  reckoned 
among  the  seventy,  and  probably  for  the  reason  that  they  were 
born  before  the  migration  into  Egypt.  They  also  appear  in  the 
later  lists  as  heads  of  families  in  Israel. 

In  the  list  of  Gen.  xlvi,  21,  the  names  of  Naaman  and  Ard  appear 
among  the  sons  of  Benjamin,  but  in  Num.  xxvi,  40,  they  substitution  of 
appear  as  sons  of  Bela.  The  most  probable  explanation  names. 
of  this  discrepancy  is  that  the  Naaman  and  Ard,  mentioned  in  Gen. 
xlvi,  21,  died  in  Egypt  without  issue,  and  two  of  their  brother 
Bela's  sons  were  named  after  them,  and  substituted  in  their  place 
to  perpetuate  intact  the  families  of  Benjamin.  In  1  Chron.  viii 
many  other  names  appear  among  the  sons  of  Benjamin  and  Bela, 
but  whether  Nohah  and  Kapha  were  substituted  for  families  that 
had  become  extinct,  or  are  other  names  for  some  of  the  same 
persons  who  appear  in  the  list  of  Gen.  xlvi,  it  is  now  impossible  to 

'  In  the  mention  of  seventy-five  souls,  Acts  vii,  14,  Stephen  simply  follows  the  read- 
ing of  the  Septuagint. 

2  Bishop  Colenso  on  the  Pentateuch  and  the  Book  of  Joshua  (New  York,  1863), 
p.  60.  This  remarkable  critic  quotes  Gen.  xlvi,  12,  and  then  observes:  "It  appears 
to  me  to  be  certain  that  the  writer  here  means  to  say  that  Hezron  and  Hamul  were  born 
in  the  land  of  Canaan.'"  But  it  is  absolutely  certain  that  that  is  one  particular  thing 
which  the  writer  does  not  say.  Again,  after  quoting  Exod.  i,  1,  5,  and  Deut.  x,  22, 
he  observes:  "I  assume  that  it  is  absolutely  undeniable  that  the  narrative  of  the 
Exodus  distinctly  involves  the  statement,  that  the  sixty-six  persons  'out  of  the  loins 
of  Jacob,'  mentioned  in  Gen.  xlvi,  and  no  others  (!),  went  down  with  him  into  Egypt." 
Mark  the  words  "  and  no  others,''''  although  Jacob's  sons'  wives  are  expressly  men- 
tioned in  Gen.  xlvi,  26.  Such  a  critic  would  appear  to  be  utterly  incapable  of  grasp- 
ing  the  spirit  and  style  of  the  Hebrew  writers. 


530  PRINCIPLES   OF 

determine.  Ashbel  is  mentioned  as  second  in  Chronicles,  but  in- 
Gen.  xlvi  he  stands  third.'  Gera,  the  fourth  name  in  the  list  in 
Genesis,  appears  twice  in  1  Chron.  viii,  3,  5,  among  the  sons  of  Bela. 
Such  variations  evince  the  independence  of  the  different  lists,  and 
yet  they  are  of  a  nature  to  confirm  rather  than  discredit  the  genu- 
ineness of  the  several  genealogies.  Each  list  had  its  own  distinct 
history  and  purpose. 

It  was  in  accordance  with  the  Hebrew  spirit  and  custom  to  frame 
a  register  of  honoured  names  so  as  to  have  them  produce  a  definite 
and  suggestive  number.  So  Matthew's  genealogy  of  our  Lord  is 
arranged  into  three  groups  of  fourteen  names  each  (Matt,  i,  17), 
and  yet  this  could  be  done  only  by  the  omission  of  several  import- 
ant names.'  While  the  compiler  might,  by  another  process  equally 
correct,  have  made  the  list  of  Gen.  xlvi  number  sixty-nine  by  omit- 
ting Jacob,  or  have  made  it  exceed  seventy  by  adding  the  names 
of  the  wives  of  Jacob's  sons,  he  doubtless  purposely  arranged  it  so 
as  to  make  it  number  seventy  souls.  The  number  of  the  descend- 
ants of  Noah,  as  given  in  the  genealogical  table  of  Gen.  x,  amounts 
to  seventy.  This  habit  of  using  fixed  numbers,  being  a  help  to 
memory,  may  have  originated  in  the  necessities  of  oral  tradition. 
The  seventy  elders  of  Israel  were  probably  chosen  with  some  ref- 
erence to  the  families  that  sprung  from  these  seventy  souls  of 
Jacob's  household,  and  Jesus'  sending  out  of  seventy  disciples 
(Luke  X,  1)  is  evidence  that  his  mind  was  influenced  by  the  mystic 
significance  of  the  number  seventy. 

It  is  well  known   that   intermarriages  between  the  tribes,  and 

|.^_   questions  of  legal  right  to  an  inheritance,  affected  a 

eai  genealogies  person's  genealogical  status.  Thus,  in  Num.  xxxii,  40, 
often  differ.         ^^^    j^.    j^    ^^^-^   ^-^^^^   j^^g^^   ^^^^   ^j^^  j^^^^   ^^   Gilead  tO 

Machir,  the  son  of  Manasseh,  "and  Jair,  the  so7i  of  Jlanasseh,  went 
and  seized  their  hamlets,  and  called  them  Havoth-jair "  (comp. 
1  Kings  iv,  13).  This  inheritance,  therefore,  belonged  to  the  tribe 
of  Manasseh;  but  a  comparison  of  1  Chron.  ii,  21,  22,  shows  that  by 
lineal  descent  Jair  belonged  to  the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  is  so  reck- 
oned by  the  chronicler,  who  also  gives  the  facts  which  explain  the 
whole  case.  He  informs  us  that  Ilezron,  the  son  of  Pharez,  the  son 
of  Judah,  married  the  daughter  of  Machir,  the  son  of  Manasseh^ 

'  Perhaps  for  "1331,  and  Becker,  in  Gen.  xlvi,  21,  we  should  read  "1133,  his  Jirstbofn. 

'  "  According  to  the  evangelist,"  says  Upham,  "  the  time-cycles  of  the  Hebrews 
(and  if  so,  the  time-cycles  of  the  world)  had  relations  lo  the  coming  of  the  Lord.  He 
points  out  that  the  life  of  the  Hebrews  unrolled  in  three  time-harmonies,  one  ending 
in  triumph,  one  in  mourning ;  and  thus  may  intimate  that  in  the  end  of  the  third  the 
notes  of  the  two  former  bleud." — Thoughts  on  the  Holy  Gospels,  p.  199. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  531 

and  by  her  became  the  father  of  Segub,  who  was  the  father  of  Jair, 
If  now  Jair  would  make  out  his  legal  claim  to  the  inheritance  in 
Gilead  he  would  show  how  he  was  a  descendant  of  Machir,  the  son 
of  Manasseh;  but  if  his  paternal  lineage  were  inquired  after,  it 
would  be  as  easily  traceable  to  Hezron,  the  son  of  Judah. 

Considerations  of  this  kind  will  go  far  to  solve  the  difficulties 

which  have  so  neatly  perplexed  critics  in  the  two  di-   ^^  ^ 

p  J    I-      i^  _  _  The  two  diverse 

verse  genealogies  of  Jesus,  as  given  in  Matt,  i,  1-17,  genealogies  of 
and  Luke  iii,  23-38.  At  this  late  day  the  particular  ^^"^' 
facts  are  wanting  which  would  put  in  clear  light  the  discrepancies 
of  these  lists  of  our  Lord's  ancestry,  and  can  only  be  supplied  by 
such  reasons  and  probable  suppositions  as  are  warranted  by  a  care- 
ful collation  of  genealogies,  and  well-known  facts  of  Jewish  custom 
in  reckoning  legal  succession  and  lineal  descent.  The  hypothesis, 
quite  prevalent  and  popular  since  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  that 
Matthew  gives  the  genealogy  of  Joseph,  and  Luke  that  of  Mary,  is 
justly  set  aside  by  a  majority  of  the  best  critics  as  incompatible 
with  the  words  of  both  evangelists,  who  alike  claim  to  give  the 
genealogy  of  Joseph.'  The  right  to  "the  throne  of  David  his  fa- 
ther" (Luke  i,  32)  must,  according  to  all  Jewish  precedent,  ideas, 
and  usage,  be  based  upon  a  legal  ground  of  succession,  as  of  an  in- 
heritance; and  therefore  his  genealogy  must  be  traced  backward 
from  Joseph  the  legal  husband  of  Mary.  And  it  is  clear,  outside 
of  these  genealogies,  that  Joseph  was  of  the  royal  house  of  David. 
Thus,  the  angel  addressed  him:  "Joseph,  son  of  David,  do  not  fear 
to  take  Mary  thy  wife  "  (Matt,  i,  20).  He  went  to  Bethlehem,  the 
city  of  David,  to  enroll  himself  with  Mary,  "  because  he  was  of  the 
house  and  family  of  David"  (Luke  ii,  45).  It  is,  however,  not  at 
all  improbable  that  Mary  also  was  of  the  house  and  family  of  Da- 
vid,* a  near  relative  —  cousin  perhaps  —  of  Joseph,  and  thus  the 
natural  succession  of  Jesus  to  the  throne  of  David  would,  according 

• 

1  Many  critics  read  Luke  iii,  23,  as  if  it  implied  that  Mary's  rather  than  Joseph's 
genealogy  is  given.  Thus:  wv  v'log,  wf  evo/iiCero,  'Iuct^^,  tov  'HAet:  "Being  the  son, 
as  was  supposed,  of  Joseph  (but  in  fact  of  Mary),  of  Eli,"  etc.  This,  however,  is  man- 
ifestly interpolating  a  most  important  statement  into  the  words  of  the  evangelist,  a 
statement  too  important  for  him  to  have  omitted  had  he  intended  such  a  thought. 
See  Meyer,  in  loco. 

2  Fairbairn  observes  that  the  marriage  of  cousins  "  perfectly  accords  with  Jewish 
practice.  ...  It  was  the  constant  aim  of  the  Jews  to  make  inheritance  and  blood- 
relationship,  as  far  as  possible,  go  together." — Hermeneutical  Manual,  p.  222.  Uphani 
similarly  remarks :  "  Royal  blood  intermarries  with  royal  blood.  When  Victoria  was 
betrothed  to  Albert  every  one  knew  that  Albert  was  a  prince,  and  every  one  would 
know  that  the  betrothed  of  a  Czarowitz,  or  of  a  Prince  of  Wales,  was  a  princess. 
The  family  of  King  David,  obscure  people  for  centuries,  must  have  married  below 
their  rank,  or  have  intermarried  among  themselves.     That  they  did  the  latter  is  so 


532  PRINCIPLES    OF 

to  Jewish  ideas,  be  most  remarkably  complete.  Certain  it  is  that 
our  Lord's  descent  from  David  was  never  questioned  in  the  earliest 
times.  He  allowed  himself  to  be  called  the  Son  of  David  (Matt,  ix, 
27;  XV,  22),  and  no  one  of  his  adversaries  denied  this  important 
€laim.  He  was  "  of  the  seed  of  David,"  according  to  Paul's  Gospel 
(2  Tim.  ii,  8;  comp.  Rom.  i,  3;  Acts  xiii,  22,  23),  and  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  says:  "It  is  evident  (rrQodrjXov,  conspicuously  inanifest) 
that  our  Lord  has  sprung  from  Judah"  (Heb.  vii,  14). 

The  Emperor  Julian  attacked  these  genealogies  on  the  ground 
Jerome  and  of  their  discrepancies,  and  Jerome,  in  replying  to  him, 
Africanus    on   QJ^ggrygg  tjjat  if  Julian  had  been  more  familiar  with 

the  Lord  s  pen- 
talogy. Jewish  modes  of  speech  he  might  have  seen  that  one 

evangelist  gives  the  natural  and  the  other  the  legal  pedigree  of 
Joseph.'  Essentially  the  same  method  of  reconciling  these  dis- 
crepancies was  advanced  long  previously  by  Africanus,  who  writes 
as  follows:  "It  was  customary  in  Israel  to  calculate  the  names  of 
the  generations  either  according  to  nature  or  according  to  the  law; 
according  to  nature  by  the  succession  of  legitimate  offspring;  ac- 
cording to  law  when  another  raised  children  to  the  name  of  a 
brother  who  had  died  childless.  For  as  the  hope  of  a  resurrection 
was  not  yet  clearly  given,  they  imitated  the  promise  which  was  to 
take  place  by  a  kind  of  mortal  resurrection,  with  a  view  to  perpet- 
uate the  name  of  the  person  who  had  died.  Since  then  there  are 
some  of  those  Avho  are  inserted  in  this  genealogical  table  that  suc- 
ceed each  other  in  the  natural  order  of  father  and  son,  some  again 
that  were  born  of  others  and  were  ascribed  to  others  by  name,  both 
the  real  and  reputed  fathers  have  been  recorded.  Thus  neither  of 
the  Gospels  has  made  a  false  statement,  whether  calculating  in  the 
order  of  nature  or  according  to  law.  For  the  families  descended 
from  Solomon,  and  those  from  Nathan,  were  so  intermingled  by 
substitutions  in  the  place  of  those  who  had  died  childless,  by  second 
marriages,  and  the  raising  up  of  seed,  that  the  same  persons  are 
justly  considered  as  in  one  respect  belonging  to  one  of  these,  and  in 
another  respect  belonging  to  others.  Hence  it  is  that,  both  of  these 
accounts  being  true,  they  come  down  to  Joseph,  with  considerable 
intricacy,  it  is  true,  but  with  great  accuracy."* 

probable,  from  the  tendency  of  Jewish  families  to  keep  together,  and  from  the  usage 
of  royal  families,  that  it  may  be  held  for  certain  that  when  St.  Matthew  stated  that 
Joseph,  a  prince  of  the  house  of  David,  married  Mary,  he  plainly  told  his  countrymen 
(and,  if  he  thought  of  others,  ho  thought  that  through  them  all  would  know)  that  the 
betrothed  of  this  prince  was  a  princess  of  the  house  of  David." — Thoughts  on  the 
Holy  Gospels,  p.  204. 

'  Jerome  on  Matt.  i. 

-  Quoted  by  Etisebius,  Eccl.  Hist.  (Bohn's  ed.),  book  i,  chap.  vii. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  523 

These  general  considerations  furnish  the  basis  on  which  several 

different  methods  of  harmonizing  the  genealogies  are   No  hypothesis 

possible.     In  the  absence  of  certain  information  no  hy-  ''^^"J'^    claim 
^  _  .  _  •'      absolute     cer- 

pothesis  can  well  claim  absolute  certainty.  The  theory  tainty. 
of  Africanus  is  that  Jacob  and  Heli  were  brothers  by  the  same 
mother.  Heli  died  childless,  and  Jacob  married  his  widow,  and  by 
her  begat  Joseph,  the  husband  of  Mary  (Matt,  i,  16),  and  yet,  accord- 
ing to  levirate  law,  Joseph  was  also  of  Heli  (Luke  iii,  23).^  Ac- 
cording to  this  theory  Matthew  records  the  natural,  and  Luke  the 
legal,  line  of  descent.  Grotius,  on  the  other  hand,  maintains  that 
Matthew's  table  gives  the  legal  succession,  inasmuch  as  he  recounts 
those  who  obtained  the  kingdom  (which  was  the  right  of  the  first- 
born) without  the  admixture  of  a  private  name.'*  He  observes 
further  that,  according  to  Matt,  i,  12,  Jechonias  begat  Salathiel,  but 
according  to  Luke  iii,  27,  Salathiel  was  the  son  of  Neri,  Now,  ac- 
cording to  Jer.  xxii,  30  (comp.  xxxvi,  30),  Jechonias  was  sentenced 
to  become  childless.  In  that  case  the  right  to  the  throne  of  David 
would  devolve  upon  the  next  nearest  heir,  which  was  probably 
Salathiel,  the  son  of  Neri,  whose  direct  lineage  Luke  traces  uj)  to 
Nathan,  another  son  of  David  (Luke  iii,  27-31).  This  theory  is 
most  fully  developed  by  Hervey,  who  maintains  "  that  Salathiel,  of 
the  house  of  Nathan,  became  heir  to  David's  throne  on  the  failure 
of  Solomon's  line  in  Jechonias,  and  that  as  such  he  and  his  descend- 
ants were  transferred  as  '  sons  of  Jeconiah '  to  the  royal  genealog- 
ical table,  according  to  the  principle  of  the  Jewish  law  laid  down 
in  Num.  xxvii,  8-11.  The  two  genealogies  then  coincide  for  two, 
or  rather  four,  generations  [Salathiel,  Zorobabel  (=  Rhesa),  Joana 
(=  Hananiah,  1  Chron.  iii,  19),  Juda  (==  Abiud  of  Matt,  i,  13,  and 
Hodaiah  of  1  Chron.  iii,  24)].  There  then  occur  six  names  in  Mat- 
thcAV  which  are  not  found  in  Luke;  and  then  once  more  the  two 
genealogies  coincide  in  the  name  of  Matthan,  or  Matthat  (Matt. 
i,  15;  Luke  iii,  24),  to  whbm  two  different  sons,  Jacob  and  Heli, 
are  assigned,  but  one  and  the  same  grandson  and  heir,  Joseph,  the 
husband  of  Mary.  The  simple  and  obvious  explanation  of  this  is, 
on  the  same  principle  as  before,  that  Joseph  was  descended  from 
Joseph,  a  younger  son  of  Abiud  (the  Juda  of  Luke  iii,  26),  but 
that  on  the  failure  of  the  line  of  Abiud's  eldest  son  in  Eleazar 
(Matt,  i,  15),  Joseph's  grandfather,  Matthan,  became  the  heir;  that 
Matthan  had  two  sons,  Jacob  and  Heli;  that  Jacob  had  no  son,  and 
consequently  that  Joseph,  the  son  of  his  younger  brother  Heli,  be- 
came heir  to  his  uncle,  and  to  the  throne  of  David.  .  .  .     Mary,  the 

*  Eusebius,  Eccl.  Hist.,  book  i,  chap.  vii. 

"See  his  Annotations  on  Matt,  i,  16,.  and  Poole,  Synopsis  Criticorum,  in  loco. 


524  PRINCIPLES   OF 

mother  of  Jesus,  was,  in  all  probability,  the  daughter  of  Jacob, 
and  first  cousin  to  Joseph,  her  husband.  So  that  in  point  of  fact, 
though  not  of  form,  both  the  genealogies  are  as  much  hers  as  her 
husband's."^ 

The  biblical  genealogies  may  appear  to  the  modern  reader  like 
GeneaioRies  uot  ^  useless  part  of  Scripture,  and  lists  of  places,  many 
useless.  of  them  now  utterly  unknown,    like  that  of  Israel's 

places  of  encampment  (Num.  xxxiii),  and  the  cities  allotted  to  the 
different  tribes  (e.  g..  Josh,  xv,  20-62),  have  been  pronounced  by 
sceptics  as  incompatible  with  lofty  ideas  of  a  written  revelation  of 
God.  But  such  notions  spring  from  a  stilted  and  mechanical  con- 
ception of  what  the  revelation  ought  to  be.  These  apparently  dry 
and  tiresome  lists  of  names  are  among  the  most  irrefragable  evi- 
dences of  the  historical  verity  of  the  Scripture  records.  If  to  our 
modern  thought  they  seem  of  no  practical  worth,  we  should  not 
forget  that  to  the  ancient  Hebrew  they  were  of  the  first  importance 
as  documents  of  ancestral  history  and  lescal  ricrhts.  The  most  un- 
critical  and  absurd  of  all  sceptical  fancies  would  be  the  notion  that 
these  lists  have  been  fabricated  for  a  purpose.  One  might  as  well 
maintain  that  the  fossil  remains  of  extinct  animals  have  been  set  in 
the  rocks  for  the  purpose  of  deception.  The  superficial  utilitarian 
may  indeed  pronounce  both  the  fossils  and  the  genealogies  alike 
worthless;  but  the  profounder  student  of  the  earth  and  of  man  will 
recognise  in  them  invaluable  indexes  of  history.  These  genealogies 
are  like  the  I'ough  stones  in  the  lower  foundation  of  a  building. 
Some  of  the  stones  are  out  of  sight  in  the  subsoil;  others  have  be- 
come nicked  and  bruised,  and  some  displaced  and  lost  in  the  lapse 
of  centuries,  but  they  were  all  in  some  way  essential  to  the  origin, 
rise,  stability,  and  usefulness  of  the  noble  superstructure. 

'  A.  C.  Hervey,  article  on  Genealogy  of  Jesus  Christ  in  Smith's  Bible  Dictionary. 
For  fullei-  details  and  discussion  of  the  same  theory  see  the  same  author's  volume  en- 
titled Genealogies  of  our  Lord  (Cambridge,  1853).  Dr.  Holmes  attempts  (article  Gen. 
of  Jesus  Christ  in  Kitto's  New  Cyclopaedia  of  Biblical  Literature)  to  controvert 
Hervey's  positions  and  arguments,  but  we  think  entirely  without  success.  The  same 
may  be  said  of  Meyer's  note  at  the  end  of  Luke  iii.  The  fact  is  that  while  no  one 
should  affirm  that  Hervey's  hypothesis  is  perfectly  certain  (for  in  the  absence  of  suffi- 
cient data  no  theory  is  entitled  to  such  a  claim)  no  one  can  prove  that  it  is  not  cor- 
rect. All  that  can  well  be  asked  for  in  the  case  is  a  hypothesis  which  will  exhibit 
how  both  genealogies  may  be  true,  and  that  which  holds  Matthew's  to  be  the  legal 
(royal)  line  and  Luke's  the  natural  seems  on  the  wliolo  to  be  most  entitled  to  credit. 
On  the  minor  discrepancies  :\m\  difficulties  of  these  genealogies  see  the  works  named 
above,  the  several  Bible  dictionaries  and  commentaries,  and  W.  H.  Mill's  discussion  of 
the  genealogies  in  his  Observations  on  the  attempted  A  pplication  of  Pantheistic  Prin- 
ciples to  the  Theory  and  Historical  Criticism  of  the  Gospel.  Cambridge,  2d  edition, 
1855. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  525 

The  greatei'  number  of  the  numerical  discrepancies  of  the  Bible 
are  probably  due  to  the  mistakes  of  copyists.  The  an-  Numerical  dis- 
cient  custom  of  using  letters  for  numbers,  and  the  great  crepancies. 
similarity  of  some  of  the  letters,  will  account  for  such  differences 
as  that  of  2  Sam.  viii,  4,  compared  with  1  Chron.  xviii,  4,  where 
final  Nun  (j),  which  stands  for  VOO,  might  easily  be  confounded  with 
Zayin  wnth  two  dots  over  it  (t)  w^hich  was  used  to  denote  7000. 
According  to  1  Kings  vii,  15,  the  two  brazen  pillars  were  each 
eighteen  cubits  high;  in  2  Chron.  iii,  15,  it  is  written:  "He"  made 
before  the  house  two  pillars  thirty  and  five  cubits  long."  Some 
have  thought  that,  as  in  Kings,  the  height  (HDip)  of  each  pillar  is 
given,  and  in  Chronicles  the  length  (^"ix)  of  the  two  pillars,  we  should 
understand  the  latter  passage  as  giving  the  length  of  the  two  pillars 
together.  They  may  have  been  cast  in  one  j^iece,  and  afterward 
cut  into  two  jjillars,  each  being,  in  round  numbers,  eighteen  cubits. 
The  more  probable  supposition,  however,  is  that  the  discrepancy 
arose  by  confounding  n'  =  18,  Avith  TO  =  35. 

The  two  lists  of  exiles  who  returned  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezra  ii, 
1— 70,  and  Neb.  vii,  6-73)  exhibit  numerous  discrepan-  Lists  of  return- 
cies  as  well  as  many  coincidences,  and  it  is  remarkable  Ezra  and  Neh^ 
that  the  numbers  in  Ezra's  list  amount  to  29,818,  and  miah. 
in  Nehemiah's  to  31,089,  and  yet,  according  to  both  lists,  the  entire 
congregation  numbered  42,360  (Ezra  ii,  64;  Neh.  vii,  66).  The 
probability  is  that  neither  list  is  intended  as  a  perfect  enumeration 
of  all  the  families  that  returned  from  exile,  but  only  of  such  fami- 
lies of  Judah  and  Benjamin  as  could  show  an  authentic  genealogy 
of  their  father's  house,  while  the  42,360  includes  many  persons  and 
families  belonging  to  other  tribes  who  in  their  exile  had  lost  all 
certain  recoi'd  of  their  genealogy,  but  were  nevertheless  true  de- 
scendants of  some  of  the  ancient  tribes.  It  is  also  noticeable  that 
Ezra's  list  mentions  494  persons  not  recognised  in  Nehemiah's  list, 
and  Nehemiah's  list  mentions  1,765  not  recognised  in  Ezi-a's;  but  if 
we  add  the  surplus  of  Ezra  to  the  sum  of  Nehemiah  (494  +  31,089 
==  31,583)  we  have  the  same  result  as  by  adding  Nehemiah's  sur- 
plus to  the  sum  of  Ezra's  numbers  (1,765  +  29,818  =  31,583). 
Hence  it  may  be  reasonably  believed  that  31,583  was  the  sum  of  all 
that  could  show  their  father's  house;  that  the  two  lists  were  drawn 
up  independently  of  each  other;  and  that  both  are  defective,  though 
one  supplies  the  defects  of  the  other. 

As  an  instance  of  doctrinal  and  ethical  inconsistency   Doctrinal  and 
between  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  we  may  cite  the  anjjes.   '^  ^^ 
Hebrew  law  of  retaliation  as  treated  by  our  Lord.     In 
Exod.  xxi,  23-25,  it  is  commanded  that  in   cases  of  assault  and 


536  PRINCIPLES   OF 

strife  resulting  in  the  injury  of  persons,  "  thou  shalt  give  life  for 
life,  eye  for  eye,  tooth  for  tooth,  hand  for  hand,  foot  for  foot,  burn- 
ing for  burning,  wound  for  wound,  stripe  for  stripe  "  (comp.  Lev. 
xxiv,  20;  Dcut.  xix,  21).  But  Jesus  says:  "Do  not  resist  tlie  evil 
man;  but  whosoever  smites  thee  upon  thy  right  cheek  turn  to  him 
the  other  also"  (Matt,  v,  39).  A  proper  explanation  of  these  con- 
tradictory Scriptures  will  also  answer  for  many  other  passages  of 
like  spirit  and  import.  The  true  explanation  is  to  be  had  by  a 
careful  consideration  of  the  historical  standpoint  of  each  speaker, 
and  the  particular  end  or  purpose  which  each  had  in  view.  We 
are  not  to  assume  that  the  Mosaic  legislation  was  without  divine 
sanction,  and  that  by  the  words  "  it  was  said  to  the  ancients " 
(Matt.  V,  21)  Jesus  meant  to  cast  a  reflection  on  the  source  or  au- 
thority of  the  old  law,  as  if  to  set  himself  against  Moses.  What 
was  said  to  them  of  old  was  well  said,  but  it  needed  modifying  at 
a  later  age  and  under  a  new  dispensation.  Moreover,  Moses  was 
legislating  for  a  peculiar  nation  at  a  distinctive  crisis,  and  enunciat- 
ing the  rights  and  methods  of  a  civil  jurisprudence.  The  old  law 
of  retaliation  was  grounded  essentially  in  truth  and  justice.  In  the 
maintenance  of  law  and  order  in  any  body  politic  personal  assault 
and  wilful  wrong  demand  penal  satisfaction,  and  this  self-evident 
Supposed  con-  truth  the  Gospel  does  not  ignore  or  set  aside.  It  recog- 
flict    between  ^ises  the  civil  maccistrate  as  a  minister  of  God  ordained 

the    Law    and  _  _  o 

the  Gospel.  to  punish  the  evildoer  (Rom.  xiii,  1-5;  1  Peter  ii,  14). 
But  in  the  sermon  on  the  mount  Jesus  is  urging  the  principle  of 
Christian  tenderness  and  love  as  it  should  prevail  in  the  personal 
intercourse  of  men  as  individuals.  The  great  principle  of  Christian 
action  should  be:  Let  not  bitterness  and  hatred  toward  any  man 
possess  your  soul.  The  spirit  of  law,  national  honour,  and  right 
logically  led  to  the  general  motto,  "  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour 
and  hate  thy  enemy "  (Matt,  v,  43).  Jesus  would  bring  about  a 
better  age,  a  kindlier  feeling  among  men,  a  higher  and  nobler  civil- 
ization. To  effect  this  he  issues  a  new  commandment  designed,  first 
of  all,  to  operate  in  a  man's  private  relations  with  his  fellow  man : 
"Love  your  enemies,  and  pray  for  them  that  persecute  you"  (Matt. 
V,  44).  Here  our  Lord  is  evidently  not  putting  forth  a  maxim  or 
method  of  civil  jurisprudence,  but  a  principle  of  individual  con- 
duct. He  shows  us,  as  Alford  observes,  "  the  condition  to  which  a 
Christian  community  should  tend,  and  to  further  which  every  pri- 
vate Christian's  oAvn  endeavours  should  be  directed.  It  is  quite 
beside  the  purpose  for  the  world  to  say  that  these  precepts  of  our 
Lord  are  too  highly  pitched  for  humanity,  and  so  to  find  an  excuse 
for  violating  them.     If  we  were  disciples  of  his  in  the  true  sense, 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  527 

these  precepts  would,  in  tlieir  spirit,  as  indicative  of  frames  of 
mind,  be  strictly  observed;  and,  as  far  as  we  ai'e  disciples,  we  shall 
attain  to  such  observance."  ' 

That  Jesus,  by  these  precepts  of  personal  conduct  in  the  ordinary 
affairs  of  life,  did  not  intend  to  forbid  the  censure  and   ^ .   . ,    ,   ^ , 

...  .  Civil  rights 

punishment  of  evildoers,  is  evident  from  his  own  con-  maintained  by 
duct.  When  struck  by  one  of  the  officers  in  the  pres-  Jesus  and  Paul. 
ence  of  the  high  priest,  our  Lord  remonstrated  against  the  flagrant 
abuse  (John  xviii,  22,  23).  When  Paul  was  similarly  smitten  by 
command  of  the  high  priest  (Acts  xxiii,  3),  the  apostle  indignantly 
cried  out:  "  God  will  smite  thee,  thou  whited  wall!"  The  same 
apostle  sets  forth  the  true  Christian  doctrine  on  all  these  points  in 
Rom.  xii,  18-xiii,  6:  "If  it  be  possible,  as  much  as  lieth  in  you,  be 
at  peace  with  all  men."  Here  he  more  than  intimates  the  improba- 
bility of  being  at  peace  with  all,  and  then,  assuming  that  one  suffers 
personal  assault  and  injury,  he  adds:  "Avenge  not  yourselves,  be- 
loved, but  give  place  to  the  wrath "  (of  God).  That  is,  let  the 
divine  wrath  take  its  own  course,  and  do  not  attempt  to  anticipate 
it,  or  stand  in  its  way  by  retaliation  and  personal  revenge.  And 
then  he  quotes  from  the  old  law  (Deut.  xxxii,  35)  where  "it  is 
written.  To  me  belongeth  vengeance;  I  will  recompense,  saith  the 
Lord."  God  will  bring  his  wrath  (opyrj)  to  bear  upon  the  offender 
in  due  time,  and  will  requite  the  wrong.  And  then  follows  another 
quotation  from  the  Old  Testament  (Prov.  xxv,  21,  22):  "If  thine 
enemy  hunger,  feed  him;  if  he  thirst,  give  him  drink;  for  by  doing 
this  thou  wilt  heap  coals  of  fire  upon  his  head."  Thereupon  he  sums 
up  the  Avhole  thought  by  saying:  "Be  not  overcome  by  the  evil 
(which  has  been  committed  against  thee),  but  overcome  the  evil  in 
the  good  "  (in  the  element  and  life  of  that  all-conquering  goodness 
which  will  be  exhibited  by  this  course  of  conduct).  But  so  far  is 
the  apostle  from  teaching  that  crimes  and  offences  are  never  to  be 
avenged  that  he  proceeds  immediately  to  show  that  God  has  or- 
dained the  civil  power  as  an  agency  and  instrument  for  this  very 
end.  Is  it  asked  what  course  the  wrath  of  God  takes  when  he 
recompenses  vengeance  upon  evildoers?  Doubtless  his  methods 
of  judgment  are  manifold,  but  the  apostle  shows  us,  in  the  imme- 
diate context,  one  of  the  established  methods  by  which  God  has 
arranged  to  punish  the  impious  offender,  namely,  through  "the 
higher  powers"  (Rom.  xiii,  1).  Rulers  are  designed  to  be  a  terror 
to  evildoers.  The  civil  magistrate  "  does  not  vainly  bear  the 
sword;  for  he  is  God's  minister,  an  avenger  for  wrath  (eKdtnog  elg 
ogyfjv,    a  divinely  ordained    avenging    agent   for  the   purpose   of 

'  Greek  Testament  on  Matt,  v,  38. 


528  PRINCIPLES    OF 

executing  the  wrath,  r]  opy^,  mentioned  above  in  xii,  19)  to  him  that 
doeth  the  evil "  (Rom.  xiii,  4).  Let  no  man,  therefore,  presume  to 
say  that  the  spirit  and  precepts  of  the  New  Testament  are  at  war 
with  those  of  tlie  Old.  In  both  Testaments  the  principles  of  broth- 
erly love  and  of  doing  good  for  evil  are  inculcated,  as  well  as  the 
duty  of  maintaining  human  rights  and  civil  order. 

Some  persons  have  strangely  assumed  that  the  prohibition  of 
The  avenging  murder  (Exod.  XX,  13)  in  the  Decalogue  is  inconsistent 
of  blood.  with  the  taking  of  human  life  in  any  form.     This  fallacy 

arises  from  a  failure  to  distinguish  between  individual  relations  and 
the  demands  of  public  and  administrative  justice.  The  right  and 
justice  of  capital  punishment  are  affirmed  in  the  most  ancient  legis- 
lation (Gen.  ix,  6).  The  law  of  Moses,  which  makes  so  prominent 
the  prohibition  of  murder,  forbids  the  taking  of  any  satisfaction  for 
the  life  of  a  murderer.  He  that  wickedly  takes  the  life  of  a  man 
must  pay  the  penalty  with  his  own  life,  or  the  very  land  will  be 
defiled  (Xum.  xxxv,  31-34).  Ancient  law  and  custom,  recognized  in 
the  books  of  Moses,  gave  the  nearest  kinsman  of  the  murdered  man 
the  right  of  avenging  this  crime.  The  practice,  however,  Avas  liable 
to  grave  abuses,  and  Moses  took  measures  to  restrict  them  by  pro- 
viding cities  of  refuge.  But  the  necessity  of  punishing  the  guilty 
criminal  is  everywhere  recognised,  and  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  nowhere 
assumes  to  set  it  aside.  The  methods  of  penalty  may  change  in  the 
course  of  ages,  and  sins  which  called  for  capital  punishment  among 
the  ancient  Hebrews  may  demand  no  such  severity  of  treatment 
under  the  Gospel  dispensation.  But  it  may  be  gravely  doubted 
whether  the  "higher  powers"  can  bear  the  sword  to  any  excellent 
purpose  if  they  be  denied  the  right  to  recompense  the  crime  of 
murder  with  capital  punishment.^ 

A  prominent  example  of  supposed  inconsistency  of  doctrine  in 
Difference  be-  the  New  Testament  is  found  in  the  diiferent  methods  of 
jlmJsonJusti^  presenting  the  subject  of  justification  in  the  epistles  of 
flcation.  Paul  and  of  James.     Paul's  teaching  is  thus  expressed 

in  Gal.  ii,  15,  16:  "We  Jews  by  nature,  and  not  sinners  from  the 

'  Meyer  observes  that  Rom.  xiii,  4,  compared  with  Acts  .xxv,  11,  "proves  that  the 
abolition  of  the  7-i(/ht  of  capital  punishment  deprives  the  magistracy  of  a  power  which 
is  not  merely  given  to  it  in  the  Old  Testament,  but  is  also  decisively  confirmed  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  which  it  (herein  lies  the  sacred  limitation  and  responsibility  of 
this  power)  possesses  as  God's  minister;  on  which  account  its  application  is  to  be  up- 
held as  a  princiiile  with  reference  to  those  cases  in  law,  where  the  actual  satisfaction 
of  the  divine  Nemesis  absolutely  demands  it,  while,  at  the  same  time,  the  right  of 
pardon  is  still  to  be  kept  open  for  all  concrete  cases.  The  character  of  being  un- 
christian, of  barbarism,  etc.,  does  not  adhere  to  the  i-i(/ht  itself,  but  to  its  abuse  in 
legislation  and  practice." — Critical  Commentary  on  Rom.  iiii,  4. 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  529 

Gentiles,  but  knowing  that  a  man  is  not  justified  by  the  works  of 
the  law  (ef  epywv  vofxov,  from  works  of  law,  i.  e,,  as  a  source  of 
merit,  ground  of  procedure  in  the  given  case,  and  so  the  reason  and 
cause  of  the  justification)  save  through  faith  of  Jesus  Christ,  even 
we  believed  in  {e.l<;,  into,  in  allusion  to  the  definite  fact  of  entering 
into  vital  union  with  Christ  at  conversion)  Christ  Jesus,  that  we 
might  be  justified  by  faith  of  Christ,  and  not  by  works  of  law;  be- 
cause by  works  of  law  shall  no  flesh  be  justified."  Substantially 
the  same  statement  is  made  in  Rom.  iii,  20,  28,  and  in  Rom.  iv  the 
doctrine  is  illustrated  by  the  case  of  Abraham,  who  "  believed  God 
and  it  was  reckoned  unto  him  for  righteousness"  (ver.  3).  On  the 
other  hand  James  insists  on  being  "  doers  of  the  word "  (Jas.  i, 
22-25).  He  extols  practical  godliness,  the  fulfilling  of  "the  royal 
law  according  to  the  Scripture  "  (ii,  8),  and  declares  that  "  faith,  if 
it  have  not  works,  is  dea(?by  itself"  (ii,  17).  He  also  illustrates  by 
the  case  of  Abraham  "when  he  offered  Isaac  his  son  upon  the 
altar,"  and  argues  "  that  the  faith  wrought  with  his  works,  and  by 
the  works  the  faith  was  perfected,  and  the  Scripture  was  fulfilled 
which  says :  Abraham  believed  God  and  it  was  reckoned  unto  him 
for  righteousness,  and  he  was  called  God's  Friend.  Ye  see,"  he 
concludes,  "that  by  works  (e^  epywv)  a  man  is  justified,  and  not  by 
faith  only"  (ii,  21-24). 

The  solution  of  this  apparent  opposition  is  to  be  had  by  a  study 
of  the  personal  religious  experience  of  each  writer,  and  Method  of  so- 
their  different  modes  of  thought  and  fields  of  operation  lutioa 
in  the  early  Christian  Church.  We  must  also  observe  the  peculiar 
sense  in  which  each  one  uses  the  tervaB  faith,  works,  and  Just  ifcation, 
for  these  words  have  each  been  used  in  all  periods  of  the  Church  to 
express  a  number  of  quite  distinct  though  kindred  ideas. 

We  should  first  remember  that  Paul  was  led  to  Christ  by  a  sud- 
den and  marvellous  conversion.  The  conviction  of  sin.  Different  per- 
the  smitings  of  soul  when  he  found  that  he  had  been   ®°°'*'    1^?f"T 

o  _  ences  of   Paul 

persecuting  the  Lord  Jesus,  the  falling  of  the  scales  and  James. 
from  his  eyes,  and  his  consequent  keen  and  vivid  perception  of  the 
free  grace  of  the  Gospel  realized  through  faith  in  Christ  Jesus — all 
this  would  necessarily  enter  into  his  ideal  of  the  justification  of  a 
sinner.  He  sees  that  neither  Jew  nor  Gentile  can  enter  into  saving 
relations  with  Christ  except  through  such  a  faith.  Then  his  mis- 
sion and  ministry  led  him  pre-eminently  to  combat  legal  Judaism, 
and  he  became  "the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles."  James,  on  the  other 
hand,  had  been  more  gradually  indoctrinated  in  Gospel  life.  His 
conception  of  Christianity  was  that  of  the  consummation  and  per- 
fection of  the  old  covenant.  His  mission  and  ministry  led  him. 
34 


580  PRINCIPLES   OF 

mainly,  if  not  altogether,  to  labour  among  those  of  the  circumcision 
(Gal.  ii,  9).  He  was  wont  to  view  all  Christian  doctrine  in  the  light 
of  Old  Testament  Scripture,  which  thereby  became  to  him  "  the  im- 
planted word"  (i,  21),  "a  perfect  law,  the  (law)  of  liberty"  (ver,  25), 
"  a  royal  law  "  (ii,  8).  And  we  must  also  bear  in  mind,  as  Neander 
observes,  "that  James  in  his  peculiar  position  had  not,  like  Paul, 
to  vindicate  an  independent  and  unshackled  ministration  of  the 
Gospel  among  the  Gentiles  in  opposition  to  the  pretensions  of 
Jewish  legal  righteousness  ;  but  that  he  felt  himself  compelled  to 
press  the  practical  consequences  and  requirements  of  the  Christian 
faith  on  those  in  whom  that  faith  had  been  blended  with  the  errors 
of  carnal  Judaism,  and  to  tear  away  the  supports  of  their  false 
confidence."  * 

Such  different  experiences  and  fields  of  action  would  naturally 
Diflerent  modes   develop  in  these  ministers  of  Jesus  Christ  correspond- 

ofapprehending  -^^  |  different  Styles  of  thought  and  teaching.  But 
and  expressing  "^         .  ^  .         .  . 

great  truths.  when,  with  these  facts  in  view,  we  analyze  their  re- 
spective teachings,  we  find  nothing  that  is  really  contradictory. 
They  simply  set  before  us  different  aspects  of  the  same  great  truths 
of  God.  Paul's  teaching  in  the  passages  quoted  above  has  refer- 
ence to  faith  in  its  first  operation ;  the  confidence  with  which  a 
sinner,  conscious  of  guilt  and  condemnation,  throws  himself  upon 
the  free  grace  of  God  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  thus  obtains  pardon  and 
peace  with  God.  James,  on  the  other  hand,  treats  of  faith  rather 
as  the  abiding  principle  of  a  godly  life,  with  works  of  piety  flowing 
from  it  as  waters  from  a  living  spring.  Paul  cites  the  case  of  Abra- 
ham while  he  is  yet  in  uncircumcision,  and  before  he  had  received 
that  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith  (Rom.  iv,  10,  11) ;  but  James 
reverts  to  the  later  time  when  he  offered  up  Isaac,  and  by  that  act 
of  fidelity  to  God's  word  had  his  faith  perfected  (Jas.  ii,  21).  The 
term  works  is  also  used  with  different  shades  of  meaning.  Paul  has 
in  mind  the  works  of  the  law  with  reference  to  the  idea  of  a  legal 
righteousness ;  James  evidently  has  in  view  works  of  practical 
piety,  like  visiting  the  fatherless  and  widows  in  their  nfliiction 
(i,  27),  and  ministering  to  the  Avants  of  the  needy  (ii,  15,  16).  Justi- 
fication, accordingly,  is  viewed  by  Paul  as  a  judicial  act  involving 
the  remission  of  sins,  reconciliation  with  God,  and  restoration  to  the 
divine  favour;  but  with  James  it  is  rather  the  maintenance  of  such 
a  state  of  favour  with  God,  a  continued  approval  in  the  sight  of 
God  and  man.  All  this  will  appear  the  more  clearly  when  we  note 
that  James  addresses  his  Jewish  brethren  of  the  dis])ersion,  who 

'  Planting  and  Training  of  the  Christian  Church.     English  Translation,  by  Ryland, 
p.  499.     New  York,  1865. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  531 

were  exposed  to  divers  temptations  and  trials  (i,  1-4),  and  were  in 
danger  of  reposing  in  a  dead  antinomian  Pharisaism;  but  Paul  is 
discussing,  as  a  learned  theologian,  the  doctrine  of  salvation,  as  it 
originates  in  the  counsels  of  God,  and  is  developed  in  the  history 
of  God's  dealings  with  the  whole  race  of  Adam. 

Moreover,  it  should  be  observed  that  James  does  not  deny  the 
necessity  and  efficacy  of  faith,  nor  does  Paul  ignore  the 
importance  of  good  works.  What  James  opposes  is  the  of  Paul  and 
mischievous  doctrine  of  faith  apart  from  works.  He  ^^^^' 
condemns  the  man  who  says  he  has  faith,  and  yet  exhibits  a  life 
and  conduct  inconsistent  with  the  faith  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
Such  faith,  he  declares,  is  dead  in  itself  (ii,  14-17).  Justification  is 
by  faith,  but  not  by  faith  only  (ver.  24).  It  evidences  itself  by 
works  of  piety  and  love.  Paul,  on  the  other  hand,  opposes  the  idea 
of  a  legal  righteousness.  He  condemns  the  vain  conceit  that  a  man 
can  merit  God's  favour  by  a  perfect  keeping  of  law,  and  shows  that 
the  law  serves  its  highest  purpose  when  it  discloses  to  a  man  "the 
knowledge  of  sin"  (Rom.  iii,  20)  and  makes  sin  itself  appear  "ex- 
ceedingly sinful"  (vii,  7-13).  But  Paul  is  as  far  from  denying  the 
necessity  of  good  works  as  evidences  of  a  believei''s  faith  in  Christ, 
as  James  is  from  denying  the  necessity  of  faith  in  Christ  in  order 
to  obtain  the  remission  of  sin.  In  Gal.  v,  6,  he  speaks  of  "  faith 
working  through  love,"  and  in  1  Cor.  xiii,  2,  he  affirms  that  though 
one  have  all  faith,  so  as  to  remove  mountains,  but  have  not  love,  he 
is  nothing.  Evidently  both  these  apostles  are  in  harmony  with 
Jesus,  who  comprehends  the  essential  relations  of  faith  and  works 
when  he  says :  "  Either  make  the  tree  good  and  its  fruit  good ;  or 
make  the  tree  corrupt  and  its  fruit  corrupt ;  for  the  tree  is  known 
by  its  fruit"  (Matt,  xii,  33). 

These  differences  between  Paul  and  James  illustrate  the  individ- 
ual freedom  of  the  sacred  writers  in  their  enunciation   ^  ^.  ._,    , , 

.  .        Individual  free- 

of  divine  truth.  Each  maintains  his  own  peculiarities  dom  of  different 
of  thought  and  style.  Each  receives  and  communi-  ^^*^'"^- 
cates  his  word  of  revelation  and  knowledge  of  the  mystery  of 
Christ  according  to  the  conditions  of  life,  experience,  and  action 
under  which  he  has  been  trained.  All  these  facts  are  to  be  taken 
into  consideration  when  we  compare  and  contrast  the  teachings  of 
Scripture  which  are  apparently  diverse.  It  will  be  found  that  these 
variations  constitute  one  manifold  and  self-evidencing  revelation  of 
the  only  true  God. 

The  general  principles  of  exegesis  set  forth  above  will  suffice  for 
the  explanation  of  all  other  doctrinal  and  ethical  inconsistencies 
which  have  been  alleged  as  existing  in  the  Bible.     Strict  regard  to 


532  PRINCIPLES    OF 

the  standpoint  of  the  speaker  or  writer,  the  occasion,  scope,  and 
plan,  together  with  a  critical  analysis  of  the  details,  will  usually 
show  that  there  exists  no  real  contradiction.  But  when  men  bring 
forward  hyperbolical  expressions  peculiar  to  oriental  speech,  or 
instances  of  Hebraic  anthi-oporaorphism,  and  press  them  into  an 
assumed  literal  significance,  they  simply  create  the  difficulties  over 
which  they  stumble.  Doctrinal  and  ethical  inconsistencies,  devel- 
oped by  such  a  process,  are  all  dissipated  by  attention  to  the  na- 
ture of  the  scriptural  language  and  a  rational  interpretation  of  the 
same. 

Mr.  Haley,  in  his  comprehensive  and  valuable  work  on  the  Dis- 
crepancies of  the  Bible,'  observes  that  these  discrepan- 

Value  of  bibli-  ^  '  n  i      i     t  j 

cai  discrepan-  cics  are  not  without  a  value.  1  hey  may  well  be  believed 
"'^^-  to  contemplate  the  following  ends:   (1)  They  stimulate 

intellectual  effort,  awaken  curiosity  and  inquiry,  and  thus  lead  to  a 
closer  and  more  extensive  study  of  the  sacred  volume.  (2)  They 
illustrate  the  analogy  between  the  Bible  and  nature.  As  the  earth 
and  heavens  exhibit  marvellous  harmony  in  the  midst  of  great 
variety  and  discord,  so  in  the  Scriptures  there  exists  a  notable  har- 
mony behind  all  the  seeming  discrepancies.  (3)  They  prove  that 
there  was  no  collusion  among  the  sacred  writers,  for  their  differ- 
ences are  such  as  would  never  have  been  introduced  by  their  design.' 
(4)  They  also  show  the  value  of  the  spirit  as  above  the  letter  of 
the  word  of  God,  and  (5)  serve  as  a  test  of  moral  character.  To 
the  captious  spirit,  predisposed  to  find  and  magnify  difficulties  in 
the  divine  revelation,  the  biblical  discrepancies  will  be  great  stum- 
blingblocks,  and  occasions  of  disobedience  and  cavil.  But  to  the 
serious  inquirer,  who  desires  to  "  know  the  mysteries  of  the  king- 
dom of  heaven"  (Matt,  xiii,  11),  a  faithful  study  of  these  discrep- 
ancies will  disclose  hidden  harmonies  and  undesigned  coincidences 
Avhich  will  convince  him  that  these  multiform  Scriptures  are  truly 
the  word  of  God. 

'  Au  Examination  of  the  Alleged  Discrepancies  of  the  Bible,  pp.  30-40.  Andover, 
1874. 

*  "  Tliese  discrepancies,"  observes  Wordsworth,  "  being  such  as  they  are  found  to 
be,  are  of  inestinial)lc  vahie.  They  show  that  there  has  been  no  collu.-5ion  among  our 
witnesses,  and  that  our  manuscript  copies  of  the  Gospels,  about  five  hundred  in  num- 
ber, and  brought  lo  us  from  all  parts  of  the  world,  have  not  been  mutilated  or  inter- 
polated with  any  sinister  design ;  they  have  not  been  tampered  with  by  any  religious 
sect  for  the  sake  of  propagating  any  ]iriv:ite  opinion  as  the  word  of  God.  These  dis- 
crepancies are,  in  fact,  evidences  of  the  purity  and  integrity  of  the  sacred  text." — 
The  New  Testament  in  the  original  Greek,  with  Notes  and  Introductions.  Preface  to 
fhe  Four  Gospels,  p,  xxii.     Lond.,  1859. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  533 


CHAPTER  XXXI. 

ALLEGED    CONTRADICTIONS    OP    SCIENCE. 

It  has  been  alleged  that  the  statements  of  Scripture  and  the  results 
of  scientific  research  are  in  numerous  instances  opposed  gta^ement  of 
to  one  another.  The  charge  appears  to  have  begotten  allegations  and 
in  some  devout  minds  a  suspicion  and  fear  that  scien- 
tific research  in  the  realm  of  nature  is  essentially  hostile  to  religion. 
On  the  other  hand,  there  are  those  who  seem  to  labour  under  a  con- 
viction that  the  doctrine  of  a  supernatural  revelation,  and  a  life 
nourished  by  faith  in  a  personal  God,  are  inimical  to  the  scientific 
investigation  of  the  laws  and  processes  of  nature  and  of  life. 
Others,  again,  have  afiirmed  that  the  Bible  was  not  given  to  teach  us 
natural  science;  that  its  great  purpose  is  to  teach  morals  and  religion, 
to  instruct  us  in  righteousness;  and  that,  therefore,  we  need  not  be 
disturbed  if  we  do  occasionally  find  its  statements  in  conflict  with 
discoveries  in  science.  Others  have  attempted  various  methods  of 
"reconciling"  science  and  the  Bible,  and  these  have  generally  acted 
on  the  supposition  that  the  results  of  scientific  discovery  neces- 
sitate a  new  interpretation  of  the  Scripture  records,  or  call  for 
new  principles  of  interpretation.  The  new  discoveries,  they  say, 
do  not  conflict  with  the  ancient  revelation;  they  only  conflict  with 
the  old  interpretation  of  the  revelation.  We  must  change  our  her- 
meneutical  methods,  and  adapt  them  to  the  revelations  of  science. 
How  for  the  thousandth  time  have  we  heard  the  story  of  Galileo 
and  the  Inquisition. 

We  may  well  pause  in  the  presence  of  these  grave  allegations 
and  issues,  and  consider  a  few  self-evident  propositions.  Fundamental 
It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  any  fact  of  nature  or  his-  considerations. 
tory  can  be  in  conflict  with  the  express  declarations  of  the  omnis- 
cient God.  If  there  be  an  apparent  conflict  it  must  be  that  there 
is  some  mistake  or  misunderstanding  about  the  fact  or  about  the 
revelation.  For  it  may  be  either  that  the  fact  alleged  is  not  as 
stated,  or  that  the  revelation  has  been  misapprehended.  If  the 
alleged  fact  is  clear  beyond  all  question,  and  yet  stands  in  certain 
conflict  with  a  statement  of  divine  revelation,  it  would  furnish 
valid  ground  for  believing  that  that  which  purported  to  be  a 
revelation  of  God  was  spurious.  Truths  of  whatever  kind  can 
never  be  in  real  conflict  with  each  other.     And  it  is  unworthy  of  a 


534  PRINCIPLES  OF 

Christian  believer  to  be  disturbed  with  a  fear  that  any  well-estab- 
lished fact  or  law  of  nature  can  harm  the  interests  of  true  I'eligion. 
We  may  welcome  light  and  knowledge  from  whatever  source,  con- 
fident that  the  truth  of  God  must  and  will  stand  all  possible  inves- 
tigation and  trial.  Hasty  natures,  however,  indulging  in  pride  of 
intellect,  or  given  to  following  the  dictum  of  honoured  masters, 
may  fall  into  grievous  error  in  either  of  two  ways:  They  may 
shut  their  eyes  to  facts,  and  hold  to  a  delusion  in  spite  of  evidence; 
or  they  may  become  the  obsequious  victims  of  "  science  falsely  so 
called."  That  certainly  is  a  false  science  which  is  built  upon  infer- 
ences, assumptions,  and  theories,  and  yet  presumes  to  dogmatize  as 
if  its  hypotheses  were  facts.  And  that  is  a  system  of  hermeneutics 
equally  false  and  misleading  which  is  so  flexible,  under  the  pressure 
of  new  discoveries,  as  to  yield  to  the  putting  of  any  number  of  new 
meanings  upon  an  old  and  common  word.  The  interests  of  sci- 
ence and  religion  alike  require  that  we  do  no  violence  to  the  facts 
of  the  one,  or  the  written  records  of  the  other. 

The  principal  points  on  which  Science  and  the  Bible  have  been 
thought  to  be  in  conflict  may  be  briefly  considered  under  three 
heads:  (1)  The  record  of  miracles,  (2)  Descriptions  of  physical  phe- 
nomena, and  (3)  The  origin  of  the  world  and  of  man.  A  brief 
discussion  of  these  will  show  how  large  a  proportion  of  the  alleged 
contradictions  are  based  upon  needless  assumptions. 

1.  The  Record  of  Miracles. 

With  those  atheistic  and  pantheistic  writers  M'ho  deny  the  exist- 
,         .  ence  of  a  personal  God   the  idea  of  a  miracle  is,  of 

Assumed     im-  ^  _  ...  . 

possibility  of  course,  a  monstrosity.  The  very  possibility  of  mira- 
mirac  es.  ^j^^  -^  -^^  them  denied,  and  they,  accordingly,  reject  a 

volume  which  teems  from  beginning  to  end  with  accounts  of  super- 
natural events.  The  deist  also  finds  in  the  record  of  these  miracles 
what  he  regards  as  inconsistent  with  the  constancy  of  nature's 
methods.  The  unchangeable  Deity,  he  aflirms,  will  never  violate  his 
own  laws.  There  is  a  uniform  order  in  the  whole  round  and  course 
of  nature;  the  action  and  reaction  of  the  forces  of  the  universe  are 
permanent  and  sure,  and  it  is  contrary  to  experience  and  observa- 
tion to  suppose  that  these  abiding  universal  laws  were  ever  violated 
and  set  at  naught  by  their  divine  Author.  Such  a  supposition,  it  is 
imagined,  involves  the  idea  that  God  allows  his  own  laws  to  be  vio- 
lated and  dishonoured;  or  that  he  perceives  defects  in  his  works 
which  he  would  fain  now  remedy  by  arbitrary  interposition.  There 
is  no  doubt  but  the  popular  mind  has  been  greatly  affected  and 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  535 

disposed  to  scepticism  by  these  and  similar  teachings  touchins:  the 
supposed  impossibility  of  miracles.* 

With  the  atheist  and  the  pantheist  the  believer  in  a  supernatural 
divine  revelation  can  have  no  ground  in  common.  The  ^o  common 
denial  of  a  personal  God,  the  creator  and  ruler  of  the  Rround  be- 
world,  is  at  war  with  the  profoundest  intuitions  of  the  pantheist,  and 
human  soul.  It  essentially  gives  the  lie  to  the  most  Christian. 
sacred  convictions  of  the  noblest  minds,  and  makes  a  mockery  of 
all  religious  worship.  All  moral  distinctions,  all  sense  of  guilt,  all 
workings  of  conscience,  all  yearnings  of  the  heart  after  the  living 
God,  are  but  so  many  forms  and  phases  of  delusion.  With  atheist 
or  pantheist,  therefore,  it  would  be  folly  to  dispute  on  the  subject 
of  miracles. 

But  the  deist  cannot  consistently  deny  the  possibility  of  miracles. 
He  accepts  the  doctrine  of  a  Supreme  Ruler,  the  crea-  Deist  cannot 
tor  and  upholder  of  the  universe,  and  any  rational  con-   consistently 

^       .  .  .        .  ■'  deny  possibility 

ception  of  primordial  creation  involves  all  the  essentials  of  miracles. 
of  a  stupendous  miracle.  On  what  rational  grounds,  then,  can  he 
assume  or  assert  that  the  Supreme  Creator  will  no  more  interpose 
to  check,  or  change,  or  modify  for  particular  ends,  the  laws  and 
forces  of  the  natural  world?  It  will  be  found,  we  think,  that  the 
common  objections  to  miracles  grow  out  of  false  definitions  of  the 
miraculous,  and  baseless  assumptions  as  to  what  constitutes  the 
order  of  nature.  In  order  to  place  the  whole  subject  in  its  proper 
light  three  considerations  are  especially  important: 

1.  Miracles  are  themselves  parts  of  a  divine  order.  So  far  from 
beinsr  violations  or  transgressions  of  nature's  laws  they  „.     ,        _ 

°   ,    ,  ,  ,  *=  ^  •'     Miracles   parts 

-are  striking  manifestations  of  the  majesty  and  power  of  of  a  divine  or- 
him  who  is  the  Supreme  Author  of  law  and  harmony.  ^^' 
No  interposition  or  interference  of  God  with  the  order  of  nature  is 
without  reason  and  design.  An  intelligent  will,  accompanied  by 
adequate  power,  may  change  the  course  of  a  river  in  order  to  save 
or  to  subvert  a  city,  but  the  introduction  of  such  efficient  causes  is 
no  violation  of  law.  The  arresting  of  disease,  the  stilling  of  a 
tempest,  the  opening  of  the  eyes  of  the  blind,  require  only  the 
presence  and  action  of  adequate  wisdom  and  jDower.     No  miracle 

'  "  There  are  those,"  says  Fisher,  "  who  find  it  hard  to  beheve  in  a  miracle  because 
the  word  is  associated  in  their  minds  with  the  notion  of  a  capricious  act,  or  of  a  make- 
shift to  meet  an  unexpected  emergency.  They  conceive  of  a  miracle  not  as  an  event 
planned  and  fitting  into  an  established  order,  but  as  done  in  obedience  to  a  sudden 
prompting,  as  a  kind  of  desperate  expedient  to  prevent  the  consequences  of  a  previous 
neglect  or  want  of  forecast.  Such  an  act,  they  properly  feel,  cannot  be  attributed  to 
<xod." — Supernatural  Origin  of  Christianity,  p.  471. 


636  PRINCIPLES   OP 

ever  took  place  without  a  cause.  Indeed,  "  the  law  of  nature's  con- 
stancy is  subordinate  to  the  higher  law  of  change." '  Before  we 
can  pronounce  any  miracle  on  record  a  violation  of  law  we  must  be 
competent  to  say  that  divine  wisdom  had  no  purpose  to  serve  by 
the  working  of  such  miracle.  "The  need  of  miracles,"  observes 
Fisher,  "is  not  founded  on  the  existence  of  any  defect  in  nature. 
The  system  of  nature  is  good,  and  is  worthy  of  God.  It  is  fitted, 
in  itself  considered,  to  disclose  the  attributes  of  the  Creator,  and  to 
call  forth  feelings  of  adoration  in  the  human  mind.  The  defect  is 
not  in  nature.  But  the  mind  of  man  is  darkened  so  that  this  pri- 
mal revelation  is  obscui-ely  discerned;  his  character,  moreover,  is 
corrupted  beyond  the  power  of  self-recovery  in  consequence  of  his 
apostasy  from  God.  Now,  if  God  shall  mercifully  approach  with 
new  light  and  new  help,  why  shall  he  not  verify  to  man  the  fact  of 
his  presence  by  suj^ernatural  manifestations  of  his  jDower  and  good- 
ness ?  In  this  case  nature  is  used  as  an  instrument  for  an  ulterior 
moral  end.  The  miracle  is  not  to  remedy  an  imperfection  in  nature, 
but  is,  like  the  revelation  which  it  serves  to  attest,  a  product  of 
the  condescension  of  God.  He  condescends  to  address  evidence  to 
the  senses,  or  to  the  understanding  through  the  senses,  in  order  to 
open  a  way  for  the  conveyance  of  the  highest  spiritual  blessing  to 
mankind.  Material  nature,  be  it  remembered,  does  not  include  the 
end  of  existence  in  itself.  It  is  a  subordinate  member  of  a  vaster 
system,  and  lias  only  an  instrumental  value."  ^ 

2.  It  is  important  to  observe,  further,  that  God's  revelation  to 
God's    leveia-  ^^^^   ^^'^^  gradually  given.      It  was   communicated   in 

tion    involves  many  parts  and  modes  (Heb.  i,  1),  and  its  historic  un- 

the   plan    and    .,,.•'   ^         .     ^         ,  ^  '     .^' 

orderofaKreat  loldrng  and  development  were  m  accordance  with   a 

historical  well-defined  plan  and  ordei*.'     "We  have  to  contem- 

moveraent     of       ,  . 

which  miracles  plate,"  says  Fisher,  "the  striking  peculiarity  of  this 
are  a  par  .  great  historic  movement,  which  embraces  the  unfolding, 
through  successive  stages  or  epochs,  of  a  religion  distinct  in  its 
spirit  as  well  as  in  its  renovating  power  from  all  other  religions 
known  among  men.  And  we  have  to  connect  with  this  view  a 
survey  of  its  subsequent  diffusion  and  leavening  influence  in  human 
society.  Comparing  this  religion  with  the  native  characteristics  of 
the  people  among  whom  it  appeared,  and  from  whose  hands  the 
priceless  treasure  was  at  length  delivered  to  mankind,  we  are  to 

'  See  this  proposition  ably  maintained  and  illustrated  by  Prof.  Edward  Hitchcock 
in  the  nil)liotheca  Sacra  for  July,  18(".8,  pp.  480-561. 

'■*  Supernatural  Origin  of  Christianity,  p.  502. 

*  See  on  this  subject  the  propositions  and  arguments  of  Walker,  Philosophy  of  the 
Plan  of  Salvation,  chapters  iii-x.     Boston,  1855. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  537 

ask  ourselves  if  this  religion,  so  pure  and  salutary,  so  enduring  and 
influential,  so  strong  as  to  survive  temporary  eclipse,  and  withstand 
through  a  long  succession  of  ages,  before  the  full  light  appeared, 
an  adversary  as  powerful  as  human  barbarism  and  corruption,  can 
be  the  product  of  man's  invention.  And  whatever  reason  there  is 
for  rejecting  this  supposition  as  irrational  is  so  much  argument  for 
the  Christian  miracles.  .  .  .  Miracles  appear  especially  at  the  sig- 
nal epochs  in  the  progress  of  the  gradually  developing  system  of 
religion.'  ...  In  connexion  with  Moses,  who  marks  an  era  in  the 
communication  of  the  true  religion;  then,  after  a  long  interval,  in 
connexion  with  tlie  prophets,  who  introduce  an  era  not  less  peculiar 
and  momentous;  and  tlien,  after  a  long  suspension  of  miraculous 
manifestation,  in  conjunction  with  the  final  and  crowning  epoch  of 
revelation,  with  the  ministry  of  Christ  and  the  founding  of  the 
Church,  the  supernatural  is  seen  to  break  into  the  course  of  history. 
There  is  an  impressive  analogy  between  the  spiritual  creation  or 
renewal  of  humanity,  and  the  physical  creation,  where  successive 
eras  are  inaugurated  by  the  exertion  of  supernatural  agency  in  the 
introduction  of  new  species,  and  after  each  epwch  history  is  re- 
manded, as  it  were,  to  its  natural  course  in  pursuance  of  an  estab- 
lished order.  Miracle  would  seem  to  be  the  natural  expression  and 
verification  of  an  opening  era  in  the  spiritual  enlightenment  of  man- 
kind, when  new  forces  are  introduced  by  the  great  Author  of  light 
and  life,  and  a  new  development  sets  in."  ^ 

3.  Another  and  highly  important  consideration  is  that  the  mira- 
cles of  Scripture  are  worthy  of  the  Author  of  a  divine  x^e  scripture 
revelation.     Thev  are  not  prodigies  put  forth  merely  to  Tniracies  wor- 

•'  i  .  ,    .  ,  thy  of  the  Au- 

startle  and  confound  the  curious  mind.     The  early  rev-   thor  of  reveia- 
elations  to  the  patriarchs  by  dreams  and  visions  of  the   ''^°°* 
night,  or  by  the  ministry  of  angels,  have  no  affinity  with  the  myths 

'  Hume's  famous  argument,  that  miracles  are  contrary  to  experience,  and  that  it  is- 
easier  to  believe  that  any  given  testimony  is  false  than  that  a  law  of  nature  was  ever 
violated,  has  received  many  answers.  Fisher  well  observes  that  "  the  fallacy  does  not 
lie  in  the  postulate  that  a  miracle  is  contrary  to  experience ;  for  there  is  a  logical  pro- 
priety in  this  provisional  assumption.  But  the  fallacy  lies  in  the  assumption  that  a 
miracle  is  jiist  as  likely  to  occur  in  the  one  place  as  m  the  other  ;  that  we  may  as  ra- 
tionally expect  a  miracle  to  be  wrought  in  the  matter  of  testimony,  whereby  the  laws 
of  evidence  are  miraculously  converted  into  a  vehicle  for  deceiving  and  misleading 
mankind,  as  to  suppose  a  miracle  in  the  physical  world  like  the  healing  of  the  blind. 
Hume's  argument  is  valid  only  on  the  hypothesis  that  God  is  as  ready  to  exert  super- 
natural power  to  make  truthful  men  falsify  as  to  perform  the  miracles  of  the  Gospel. 
Introduce  the  fact  of  a  personal  God,  a  moral  government,  and  a  wise  and  benevolent 
end  to  be  subserved  through  miraculous  interposition,  and  Hume's  reasoning  is 
emptied  of  all  its  force." — Supernatural  Origin  of  Christianity,  pp.  495,  496. 

*  Supernatural  Origin  of  Christianity,  pp.  506-508. 


-  538  PRINCIPLES   OF 

and  legends  of  paganism.  The  miracles  of  the  Exodus  were  both 
an  evidence  of  the  divine  mission  of  Moses  and  a  series  of  judg- 
ments upon  the  idolatrous  superstitions  of  Egypt.  Each  sign  and 
wonder  was  in  style  and  character  worthy  of  the  God  who  spoke 
the  decalogue  from  the  quaking  mountain.  The  miracles  that  at- 
tended the  ministry  of  later  prophets  had  a  pertinency  which  shoAVS 
them  to  have  been  grounded  in  divine  and  not  in  human  wisdom. 
But,  especially,  in  the  mighty  works  of  the  Son  of  God  do  we 
observe  a  character  that  harmonizes  with  the  purposes  of  redemp- 
tion. The  miracles  of  Jesus  are  acts  of  tenderness  and  love,  exhibi- 
tions of  divine  glory  and  wisdom,  and  at  the  same  time  symbolical 
tokens  of  the  mysteries  of  redemption.  Even  the  miracle  of  judg- 
ment, the  cursing  of  the  barren  fig-tree,  abounds  with  suggestive 
lessons  of  the  highest  moral  value.  Trench  observes  that  the  pre- 
tended prodigies  of  witchcraft,  even  if  actually  performed,  were, 
nevertheless,  works  which  had  no  worthy  significance; '  "they  were 
not,  what  each  true  miracle  is  always  more  or  less,  redemj^tive  acts; 
in  other  words,  works  not  merely  of  power,  but  of  grace,  each  one 
an  index  and  a  pipphecy  of  the  inner  work  of  man's  deliverance, 
which  it  accompanies  and  helps  forward.  But  it  was  pre-eminently 
thus  with  the  miracles  of  Christ,  Each  one  of  these  is  in  small, 
and  upon  one  side  or  another,  a  partial  and  transient  realization  of 
the  great  work  which  he  came  that,  in  the  end,  he  might  accomplish 
perfectly  and  forever.  They  are  all  pledges  in  that  they  ai'e  them- 
selves firstfruits  of  his  power;  in  each  of  them  the  word  of  salvation 
is  incorporated  in  an  act  of  salvation.  Only  when  regarded  in  this 
light  do  they  appear  not  merely  as  illustrious  examples  of  his 
might,  but  also  as  glorious  manifestations  of  his  holy  love." ' 

The  miracles  of  Scripture,  then,  are  to  be  regarded  as  historical 
facts,  and  interpreted  as  other  facts  of  history. 

2.  Descriptions  op  Physical  Phenomena. 

There  are  found  in  the  Bible  descriptions  of  natural  phenomena, 
allusions  to  the  movement  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  and  narratives 

'  This  thought  appears  in  the  Recognitions  of  Clement,  where  Peter  is  represented 
as  opposing  Simon  Magus:  "For  tell  me,  I  pray  you,  what  is  the  use  of  showing 
statues  wallving,  dogs  of  brass  or  stone  barliing,  mountains  dancing,  of  flying  through 
the  air,  and  such  like  things,  which  you  say  that  Simon  did  ?  But  those  signs  which 
are  of  the  good  One  are  directed  to  the  advantage  of  men,  as  are  those  which  were 
done  by  our  Lord,  who  gave  sight  to  the  blind  and  hearing  to  the  deaf,  raised  up  the 
feeble  and  the  lame,  drove  away  sicknesses  and  demons,  raised  the  dead,  and  did 
other  like  tilings." — Recognitions,  etc.,  book  iii,  chap.  60,  EngUsh  translation,  as  in 
Clark's  Ante-Nicene  Library. 

*  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  81. 


BIBLICAL   HEKMENEUTICS.  539 

of  changes  effected  on  the  surface  of  the  earth,  which  have  been 
alleged  to  be  unscientific  and  inconsistent  with  facts.  The  instances 
usually  cited  in  proof  of  this  charge  are  descriptions  of  the  sun, 
moon,  and  stars,  allusions  to  their  apparent  movements,  the  account 
of  the  sun  and  moon  standing  still,  and  the  deluge  of  waters  which 
occurred  in  the  days  of  Noah. 

The  statement  that  God  made  two  great  luminaries  to  rule  re- 
spectively the  day  and  the  night,  and  set  them,  along  supposed  evi- 
with  the  stars,  in  the  expanse  of  heaven  to  give  light  ^^^^^^^  t°^n - 
upon  the  earth  (Gen.  i,  16,  17),  is  supposed  to  rest  upon  my. 
the  now  exploded  Ptolemaic  theory  of ,  the  universe,  according  to 
which  the  earth  is  the  centre  of  the  whole  system,  and  sun,  moon, 
and  stars  revolve  around  it.  With  this  accords  the  frequent  men- 
tion of  the  rising  of  the  sun  and  the  going  down  of  the  same  (Psa. 
1,  1).  In  Psa.  xix,  4-6,  the  sun  is  poetically  conceived  as  having 
his  tent  or  dwelling  in  the  heavens,  and  coming  forth  out  of  his 
chamber  in  the  morning  to  run  a  race  from  one  end  of  the  heavens 
unto  the  other.  The  poetical  parts  of  Scripture  abound  in  similar 
descriptions  of  things  in  the  earth  and  the  heavens.  All  such  allu- 
sions, it  has  been  claimed,  betray  a  false  astronomy. 

This  class  of  objections,  alleged  as  contradictions  of  science,  can 
scarcely  now  be  regarded  as  ingenuous.  Can  anything  g^^.^  expres- 
be  more  evident  than  tl;ie  fact  that  in  descriptions  of  sions  merely 
such  phenomena  the  sacred  writers  use  the  language  of  of  common 
common  life  ?  In  spite  of  all  scientific  advancement  ^^^• 
the  world  still  speaks,  and  probably  ever  will  continue  to  speak,  of 
the  sun's  rising  and  setting.  The  stars  appear  to  the  common 
observer  as  so  many  bright  lights  set  in  the  vault  of  heaven.  To 
an  observer  on  the  earth  the  sun  and  moon  are  the  two  great  lights 
of  the  sky,  and  the  fact  is  not  in  the  least  altered  by  the  discovery 
that  the  moon  is  the  earth's  satellite,  and  the  earth  is  a  compara- 
tively small  planet  revolving  about  the  sun.  To  the  human  observ- 
er the  sun  is  the  great  luminary;  he  rises  and  sets,  and  rules  the 
day;  and  this  fact  remains  in  spite  of  the  discovery  that  many  of  the 
stars  are  also  luminaries  immensely  larger  than  our  "  king  of  day." 
The  Bible  is  written  in  the  common  and  popular  language  of  men, 
not  in  the  technical  forms  of  science.  And  when  we  read  such 
poetic  strains  as  that  which  embodies  the  striking  similes  of  the 
sun  in  Psa.  xix,  4-6,  we  no  more  suppose  the  author  to  have  been 
teaching  a  false  astronomy  than  we  would  accuse  Longfellow  of 
such  false  science  when  he  writes: 

Silently,  one  by  one,  in  the  infinite  meadows  of  heaven, 
Blossomed  the  lovely  stars. 


540  PRINCIPLES   OF 

The  standing  still  of  the  sun  and  moon  at  the  command  of  Joshua 
gj.jj  (Josh,  X,  12-14)  has  been  supposed  to  predicate  a  mir- 
of  the  sun  and  acle  incredibly  stupendous.  It  was  believed  to  yield 
'^"°°'  such  evidence  that  the  earth  was  stationary,  and  that  the 

sun  revolved  around  it  that,  when  Galileo  taught  a  contrary  doc- 
trine, he  was  charged  with  formal  heresy,  and  his  scientific  system 
was  declared  by  the  Church  of  Rome  to  be  "  expressly  contrary  to 
the  Scripture."  The  literal  interpretation  of  the  passage  naturally 
assumed  that  the  sun  stopped  short  in  mid-heaven  at  the  fiat  of 
Joshua.  Afterward,  the  general  acceptance  of  the  Copernican 
system  led  to  the  supposition  that  the  diurnal  motion  of  the  earth 
was  checked  for  a  time,  thus  causing  the  sun  to  appear  to  stand 
still.  Probably  no  well-informed  student  of  the  Scriptures  will 
now  accept  either  of  these  views.  The  two  prevalent  interpreta- 
tions of  the  passage,  between  which  the  best  expositors  are  now 
divided,  may  be  designated  the  optical  and  the  poetical.  Those 
who  adopt  the  first-named  exposition  believe  that  we  have  here  the 
record  of  a  miracle,  which  consisted  in  a  supernatural  refraction  of 
light.  They  suppose  that  after  the  sun  had  gone  down,  the  light 
was  miraculously  prolonged,  and  by  refraction  both  sun  and  moon 
appeared  for  a  long  time  to  be  stationary  above  the  horizon.  This 
hypothesis,  however,  scarcely  accords  with  Joshua's  command  for 
the  sun  to  stand  still  in  Gibeon,  and  the  statement  that  "the  sun 
stood  still  in  the  midst  of  the  heavens"  (Josh,  x,  13),  not  over  the 
western  horizon. 

But  commentators  have  been  slow  to  note  the  fact  that  the  pas- 
The  passa-re  a  ^^»®  ^'^  question  is  professedly  a  quotation  from  the 
poetical  quota-  Book  of  Jasher.  That  book  appears  to  have  been  a 
compilation  of  national  songs  (comp.  2  Sam.  i,  18),  and 
such  a  quotation  should  no  more  be  pressed  into  a  literal  interpre- 
tation than  the  highly  wrought  passage  from  the  nineteenth  psalm 
already  noticed.  Where  the  quotation  begins  and  ends  is  some- 
what uncertain,'  but  the  whole  passage,  from'verse  12  to  verse  15, 
has  every  appearance  of  an  interpolation.  As  the  Book  of  Jasher 
contained  David's  elegy  it  could  not  have  been  completed  before 
the  time  of  David ;  but  the  Book  of  Joshua  was  probably  written 
long  before  that  date.     The   song  of  Joshua's  victory,  however, 

'  It  is  commonly  affirmed  that  the  formula  of  citation  must  stand  at  the  beginning 
or  end  of  the  passage  cited,  and  hence  some  hold  that  what  follows  the  words,  "  Is  not 
this  written  in  the  Book  of  Jasher?  "  (Josh,  x,  13),  do  not  belong  to  the  book  referred 
to.  But  this  is  by  no  means  certain.  We  may  understand  the  formula  of  citation  to 
be  thrown  in  parentlictically  in  the  midst  of  the  passage  cited,  and  such  appears  to 
be  the  caso  in  this  (juotation. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  541 

may  have  been  written  by  an  eyewitness  of  the  battle,  and  may 
have  been  directly  quoted  by  the  author  of  the  Book  of  Joshua,  for 
such  an  anthology  as  the  Book  of  Jasher  would  be  likely  to  receive 
additions  from  time  to  time,  as  one  national  song  after  another  ob- 
tained popular  currency.  Considered  therefore  as  a  poetical  quota- 
tion, the  passage  is  not  to  be  literally  understood,  and  all  supposed 
conflict  between  its  statements  and  scientific  facts  is  at  once  set 
aside.  "  The  standing  still  of  the  sun  and  moon,"  says  Fay,  "  is  no 
more  to  be  understood  literally  than  that  fighting  of  the  stars  from 
their  coui'ses  (Judges  v,  20),  or  the  melting  down  of  the  mountains 
(Isa.  xxxiv,  3  ;  Amos  ix,  13;  Micah  i,  4),  the  rending  of  the  heav- 
ens (Psa.  xviii,  9),  or  the  skipping  of  Lebanon  (Psa.  xxix,  6),  or  the 
clapping  of  hands  by  the  trees  in  the  field  (Isa.  Iv,  12),  or  the  leap- 
ing of  the  mountains  and  hills  (Psa.  cxiv,  6).  It  is  the  language  of 
poetry  which  we  have  here  to  interpret,  and  poetry,  too,  of  the  most 
figurative,  vehement  kind,  which  honours  and  celebrates  Joshua's 
confidence  in  God  in  the  midst  of  the  strife.  In  this  the  most  posi- 
tive interpreters  (Keil,  Kurtz,  Hengstenberg),  however  they  may 
differ  as  to  the  particulars,  and  as  to  textual  criticism,  are  j^erfectly 
at  one  against  a  literal  interjDretation  of  the  passage." ' 

Another  point  at  which  science  and  the  Bible  have  been  alleged 
to  be  in  conflict  is  the  narrative  of  the  Deluge  in  Gen.  Narrative  of 
vi-viii.  The  doctrine  of  a  universal  flood  is  beset  with  the  Deluge. 
iiisuperable  difficulties.  The  shells  and  corals  found  in  deposits  at 
the  tops  of  high  mountains,  and  which  wei'e  once  believed  to  fur- 
nish evidence  of  a  universal  deluge,  are  seen  upon  closer  inspection 
to  be  results  of  geologic  action  older  than  the  age  of  Noah.  They 
are  not  scattered  over  the  surface,  as  would  have  been  the  case  if 
they  had  been  carried  there  by  a  flood  of  waters,  but  deposited 
deep  in  the  layers  of  the  mountains  as  well  as  near  the  surface.  It 
is  to  be  further  observed  that  the  loose  scoriag  on  the  mountains  of 
Auverffne  and  Lansuedoc  in  France  must  have  been  disturbed  and 
swept  away  by  a  deluge  that  covered  those  heights.  Yet  the  dust 
and  cinders  of  these  volcanic  craters  bear  witness  that  they  have 
remained  undisturbed  by  any  flood  of  waters  from  a  period  long 
anterior  to  that  of  the  time  of  Noah. 

It  may  also  be  reasonably  objected  to  a  universal  flood  that  the 
salt  waters  of  the  fountains  of  the  great  deep,  in  overflowing  the 

'  Commentary  on  Joshua  in  Lange's  Biblework.  The  Speaker's  Commentary  takes 
substantially  the  same  view :  "  The  whole  passage  may,  and  even  ought,  on  critical 
grounds  to  be  taken  as  a  fragment  of  unknown  date  and  uncertain  authorship,  inter- 
polated into  the  text  of  the  narrative,  the  continuity  of  which  is  broken  by  the  intru- 
sion."—Note  at  end  of  Chapter  x. 


542  PRINCIPLES   OF 

land,  must  have  destroyed,  in  the  course  of  nearly  a  year,  all  fresh- 
water fish,  and  plants  and  seeds  of  the  land,  none  of 
Insuperable  ob-  ^  . 

jeciions  lo  its   which  appear  to  have  been  taken  into  the  ark.     Add 

universality.  ^^  these  considerations  the  inadequacy  of  any  ark  con- 
structed by  human  hands  to  contain  pairs  of  all  cattle,  beasts,  fowls, 
and  insects  now  known  to  exist  upon  the  earth,  together  with  rood 
sufficient  to  sustain  them  for  a  year.  The  different  classes  and  spe- 
cies of  livinsr  creatures  are  known  to  number  hundreds  of  thousands. 
They  are  distributed  into  groups  and  provinces,  and  many  of  them 
seem  to  have  been  propagated  from  distinct  centres  of  creation. 
The  animals  of  the  polar  regions  and  those  of  the  tropics  could  not 
long  live  together  except  by  a  protracted  miracle.  "To  collect 
specimens,"  says  Geikie,  "  of  all  the  species  of  terrestrial  creatures 
inhabiting  the  earth,  it  would  be  necessary  not  only  to  visit  each 
parallel  of  latitude  on  both  sides  of  the  equator,  but  to  explore  the 
whole  extent  of  each  parallel,  so  as  to  leave  out  none  of  the  separ- 
ate provinces.  With  all  the  appliances  of  modern  civilization,  and 
all  the  labours  of  explorers  in  the  cause  of  science  throughout  every 
part  of  the  world,  the  task  of  ascertaining  the  extent  of  the  animal 
kingdom  is  probably  still  far  from  being  accomplished.  Not  a  year 
passes  away  without  witnessing  new  names  added  to  the  list  of  the 
zoologist.  Surely  no  one  will  pretend  that  what  has  not  yet  been 
achieved  by  hundreds  of  labourers  during  many  centuries  could 
have  been  performed  by  one  of  the  patriarchs  during  a  few  years. 
It  was  of  course  necessary  that  the  animals  should  be  brought 
alive ;  but  this,  owing  to  their  climatal  susceptibilities,  was  in  the 
case  of  many  species  impossible,  and- even  with  regard  to  those 
which  might  have  survived  the  journey,  the  difficulties  of  their 
transport  must  have  been  altogether  insuperable."' 

It  should  further  be  added  that  the  flooding  of  all  continents  and 
islands  so  as  to  submerge  the  tops  of  the  highest  mountains  would 
increase  the  earth's  diameter  by  many  miles;  it  Avould  involve  in- 
conceivable climatic  changes  over  the  whole  surface  of  the  globe, 
add  greatly  to  the  force  of  its  attraction,  change  its  orbit  round 
the  sun,  and  disturb  the  movements  of  all  the  other  planets.  In 
short,  the  doctrine  of  a  universal  deluge  involves  a  multiplicity 
of  such  stupendous  miracles  that  it  cannot  be  accepted  except 
on  statements  and  reasons  of  the  most  absolute  and  imperative 
character. 

But  why  should  we  assume  or  teach  that  the  flood  described  in 
Gen.  vi-viii  was  universal  ?  Tlie  assumption  has  arisen  from  a 
supposed  necessity  of  understanding  such  expressions  as  those  in 
*  Kitto's  New  Biblical  Cyclopedia,  article  Deluge. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  54a 

Gen.  vi,  13;  vii,  19,  in  their  widest  possible  import.  In  the  first 
passage  God  says  to  Noah:  "An  end  of  all  flesh  has  scripture  usage 
come  before  me,"  and  in  the  second:  "The  waters  pre-  ^Pft'ermsT^ 
vailed  very  exceedingly  upon  the  land,  and  all  the  high  limited  areas, 
hills  which  were  under  all  the  heavens  were  covered."  These  ex- 
pressions properly  denote  universality,  but  before  any  interpreter 
decides  their  real  import  he  must  consider  the  standpoint  of  the 
writer,  and  the  familiar  usage  of  such  terms  among  the  ancient 
orientals.  The  narrative  of  the  flood  is  probably  the  account  of  an 
eyewitness.  Its  vividness  of  description  and  minuteness  of  details 
contain  the  strongest  evidence  that  it  is  such.  It  was  probably  a 
tradition  handed  down  from  Shem  to  his  descendants  until  it  was 
finally  incorporated  in  the  Books  of  Moses.  The  terms,  "  all  flesh," 
"  all  the  high  hills,"  and  "  all  the  heavens,"  denote  simply  all  those 
known  to  the  observer.  They  are  parallel  with  such  expressions  as, 
"  This  day  I  begin  to  put  the  dread  and  awe  of  thee  upon  the  face 
of  the  nations  under  all  the  heavens"  (Deut.  ii,  25;  comp,  iv,  19); 
"  There  is  not  a  nation  or  kingdom  where  my  lord  has  not  sent  to 
seek  thee"  (1  Kings  xviii,  10),  So  the  allusion,  in  Job  xxxvii,  3, 
to  the  thunder  and  lightning,  is  essentially  confined  to  a  limited 
area:  "Under  all  the  heavens  he  lets  it  loose,  and  his  lightning 
over  the  borders  of  the  land."  A  comparison  of  such  passages  as 
Isa,  Ixvi,  23  ;  Jer.  xxv,  31,  32  ;  and  Ezek.  xx,  48;  xxi,  4,  shows  also 
that  "  all  flesh  "  is  a  familiar  Hebraism  denoting  the  great  mass  of 
mankind,  but  not  necessarily  implying  the  absolute  and  universal 
totality  of  the  human  race.  The  common  translation  of  the  Hebrew 
word  fix  by  our  word  earth  is  also  misleading,  and  the  source  of 
much  false  exegesis.  This  word  denotes,  according  to  the  common 
usus  loquendi,  a  limited  territory,  a  region  or  country,  and  may  al- 
ways be  pro])erly  rendered  by  our  word  land.  The  Noachic  deluge 
submerged  all  the  land  under  all  the  heavens  (or  sky)  known  to 
the  antediluvians.  It  was  in  all  probability  universal  to  the  human 
race,  destroying  the  entire  family  of  man  except  Noah  and  his 
household,  Th^s  opinion  is  corroborated  by  the  traditions  of  a  flood 
preserved  among  all  existing  nations. 

The  entire  territory  occupied  by  the  human  race  up  to  the  time 
of  the  deluge  need  not  have  been  larger  than  the  land   ^^^    Noachie 

of  Egypt,  or  of  Canaan;  but  if  it  had  been  a  hundred   deluge   local 

'-'  ,  ,,  „-  ^    .       ,,  ii+*n    fiiid  limited, 

times  larger  than  either  or  those  countries  it  would  stiu   j,^^  universal 

have  been  a  comparatively  small  portion  of  the  entire   as  to  the  hu- 

face  of  the  earth.     The  considerations  briefly  indicated 

above  have  led  nearly  all  recent  expositors  to  abandon  the  notion 

of  a  universal  deluge.     All  conflict  with  science  is,   accordingly, 


544  PRINCIPLES   OF 

disposed  of  by  these  considerations,  and  no  one  can  justly  allege 
that  the  biblical  narrative  of  the  flood  is  contradicted  by  scientific 
discovery  until  he  can  pi*ove  that  no  limited  section  of  the  earth's 
surface  has,  since  man  began  his  existence,  been  subjected  to  such 
a  destructive  judgment. 

3.  The  Origin  of  the  World  and  of  Man. 
But  the  great  battle-field  on  which  theologians  and  scientists 
have  been  most  in  conflict  is  the  Mosaic  narrative  of 

The  Mosaic  nar- 
rative of  crea-  creation.     This  narrative  is  supposed  to  describe  the 

*'"°"  origin  of  all  things,  including  matter,  life,  and  mind; 

and  the  modern  theories  of  evolution,  and  assertions  of  man's  im- 
mense antiquity,  have  seemed  to  command  such  an  array  of  evi- 
dences that  it  has  become  very  common  to  study  Genesis  with  con- 
stant deference  to  these  theories  and  assertions,  and  even  to  study 
biology  and  evolution  with  equal  deference  to  the  Book  of  Genesis. 
The  highest  aim  of  some  writers  would  seem  to  be  the  construction 
of  an  exegesis  of  Genesis  that  may  at  once  harmonize  with  the 
statements  of  the  sacred  M'riter  and  the  hypothesis  of  leading  scien- 
tists. These  writers  all  assume  that  the  creation  described  at  the 
beginning  of  Genesis  must  be  identical  with  the  primordial  con- 
struction of  the  whole  material  universe,  and  the  origin  of  all  its 
living  tribes.  And  this  kind  of  effort  at  exegesis  became  noticeable 
long  before  the  doctrine  of  Darwinian  evolution  attained  the  prom- 
inence and  prevalence  it  now  holds.  Ever  since  the  researches  of 
geologists  and  astronomers  disclosed  the  great  antiquity  of  our 
globe,  and  the  immensity  of  the  starry  universe,  there  has  been  a 
ceaseless  effort  to  "reconcile  Science  and  the  Bible."  In  some  of 
these  attempts  devout  men  have  seemed  to  lose  all  common  sense 
and  reason,  and  have  launched  out  upon  a  series  of  fanciful  conjec- 
tures by  which  the  revelation  of  God  has  been  strangely  handled. 
From  some  of  these  attempted  reconciliations  it  aj^pcars  that  good 
men  may  unwittingly  trifle  with  the  Scriptures  in  the  name  of 
science.  That,  surely,  is  a  most  unscientific  process  which  ignores 
the  usics  loquendi  of  the  simplest  words  of  a  language,  gives  a 
well-known  term  half  a  dozen  different  meanings  in  a  single  chap- 
ter, and  lugs  in  conjecture  and  doubtful  hypothesis  to  determine 
the  meaning  of  words  familiar  as  our  mother  tongue. 

Among  the  many  modern  attempts  to  interpret  the  Mosaic  rec- 
Geoiogicai  meth-  ^^^  there  have  arisen  into  prominence  three  differ- 
ed of  in'erpreta-   ent  methods,  which  we  may  appropriately  designate 
the  Geological,  the  Cosmological,  and  the  Idealistic. 
According   to    the  first-named  method,  the    six  days  of  creation 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  545 

■correspond  with  six  long  periods  of  geological  development  tracea- 
ble in  the  crust  of  the  earth.  But  more  careful  and  extended  re- 
searches fail  to  find  in  the  testimony  of  the  rocks  an  exact  or  even 
substantial  agreement  between  the  geological  epochs  and  the  days 
of  Genesis.  Even  Hugh  Miller,  one  of  the  most  dtstinguished  ad- 
vocates of  this  theory,  is  obliged  to  acknowledge  that  geology  has 
no  epochs  that  correspond  with  the  first,  second,  and  fourth  days  of 
the  Mosaic  narrative.  Of  these  periods  he  says,  "we  need  expect 
to  find  no  record  in  the  rocks.  The  geologist,  in  his  attempts  to 
collate  the  divine  wit-h  the  geologic  record  has  only  three  of  the 
six  periods  of  creation  to  account  for — the  period  of  plants,  the 
period  of  great  sea-monsters  and  creeping  things,  and  the  period  of 
cattle  and  beasts  of  the  earth."  '  But  this  is  well  pronounced  by  a 
later  critic  "  a  very  inadmissible  assertion.  Any  one,  be  he  geolo- 
gist, astronomer,  theologian,  or  philologist,  who  attempts  to  explain 
the  Hebrew  narrative,  is  bound  to  take  it  with  all  that  belongs  to 
it;  and,  in  truth,  if  the  fourth  day  really  represented  an  epoch  of 
creative  activity,  geology  would  be  able  to  give  some  account  of 
it.''  ^  Prof.  C.  H.  Hitchcock  seems  to  admit  that  geology  has  prop- 
erly no  period  corresponding  to  the  fourth  day,  but  he  adopts  the 
notion  that  the  Paleozoic  Age  of  geologists  may  synchronize  with 
the  fourth  day  of  Genesis,  and  supposes  "that  the  attention  of  the 
prophet  during  this  vision  was  so  much  occupied  with  the  contem- 
plations of  the  astronomical  bodies  that  he  overlooked  the  progress 
of  events  upon  the  earth,  none  of  which  were  very  different  from 
what  had  been  previously  perceived."  '  Such  a  notion  could  scarce- 
ly have  been  entertained  except  under  the  pressure  of  a  foregone 
conclusion  that  the  days  of  Genesis  and  the  epochs  of  Geology 
must  somehow  be  synchronized. 

Others,  not  satisfied  with  the  dubious  results  of  the  geological 
interpretation,  have  sought  a  wider  and  grander  mean-  rpj^g  cosmoiog- 
ing  in  the  first  of  Genesis  by  making  it  a  cosmogony,  icai  theory. 
They  base  their  exposition,  not  merely  on  the  results  of  geological 
research,  but  more  especially  on  the  nebular  hypothesis,  and  their 
method  of  explaining  Genesis  may  be  called  the  Cosmological. 
We  have  no  fault  to  find  with  the  nebular  hypothesis  of  the  origin 
of  the  universe.  We  see  no  reason  why  God  may  not  have  brought 
forth  the  world  in  that  way  as  well  as  in  any  other  imaginable. 
But  we  object  to  the  methods  of  interpretation  by  which  that 
hypothesis  is  forced  into  an  exposition  of  the  simple  narrative  of 
Genesis.     Twisting  words  out  of  their  natural  and  established  usage, 

'  Testimony  of  the  Rocks,  p.  159.  "^  Essays  and  Reviews,  p.  269. 

^  Relations  of  Geology  to  Theology,  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  July,  186Y,  p.  444. 
35 


646  PRINCIPLES  OF 

and  foisting  into  them  the  ideas  of  a  later  age,  is  a  process  essen- 
tially at  war  with  all  safe  and  sound  interpretation.  The  ideas  may- 
be true,  and,  in  themselves,  of  the  highest  scientific  value;  but  the 
question  of  the  interpreter  must  be:  Are  these  the  ideas  intended 
in  this  narrative  ? 

Prof.  A.  II.  Guyot's  essay  on  "  Cosmogony  and  the  Bible  "  '  is 
regarded  as  one  of  the  ablest  expositions  of  Genesis 
from  the  standpoint  of  the  nebular  hypothesis.  He 
considers  the  days  as  vast  cosmogonic  periods,  or,  as  he  calls  them, 
"organic  phases  of  creation."  But  he  affirms  that  in  the  first  chap- 
ter of  Genesis  the  word  day  is  used  in  Jive  different  setises  !  Wha 
knows,  then,  but  the  word  6rOc7  may  have,  in  the  same  chapter,  six 
or  seven  different  meanings — one  for  every  day  ?  He  also  affirms 
that  the  word  earth  means,  in  the  second  verse,  "  the  primordial 
cosmic  material  out  of  which  God  was  going  to  organize  the  heav- 
ens and  the  earth,"  and  is  "  an  equivalent  to  matter  in  general." 
So  it  would  appear  that  in  the  first  verse  of  the  Bible  earth  and 
heavens  are  synonymous  terms.  "The  same  reasoning,"  he  adds, 
"applies  to  the  loaters  of  the  second  verse.  The  Hebrew  word 
malm  does  not  necessarily  mean  waters,  but  applies  as  well  to  the 
fluid  atmosphere;  it  is  simply  descriptive  of  the  state  of  cosmic 
matter  comprised  in  the  word  earth."  And  so  he  proceeds,  dog- 
matically putting  meanings  to  suit  his  convenience  upon  the  most 
simple  words  of  the  language.  Upon  such  principles  and  such 
reasoning  we  may,  doubtless,  make  the  Bible  mean  anything  we 
please.  If  words  like  day,  land,  heavens,  and  waters  may  be  ex- 
plained as  is  done  by  this  writer,  can  we  fairly  hope  for  any  settled 
princijyles  of  interpretation  ?  The  explanations  of  the  biblical  nar- 
rative itself  are  treated  as  of  no  account.  The  sacred  writer  tells  us 
that  God  called  the  light  day,  and  the  dry  land  earth.  Why,  then, 
should  we  set  aside  or  ignore  the  meaning  which  he  puts  upon  his 
own  words?  But  if  one  would  be  consistent  when  he  insists  that 
earth  means  cosmical  matter,  and  light  means  cosmical  light,  and 
days  mean  cosmogonic  ages,  why  should  he  not  also  complete  the 
cosmogonic  symmetry  of  the  picture  with  cosmical  cattle  and  cos- 
mical man  ? 
„    .     ,   . ,    ,         Another  class  of  interpreters,  not  satisfied  with  cither 

Ronson  s  ideal-  ,  . 

istic  interpreta-  the    geological    or   cosmological    exposition  of    Gene- 

°°'  sis,  have  attempted  to  escape  all  responsibility  for  a 

literal    interpretation    by  resolving  the   Mosaic   narrative   into   a 

'  Cosmogony  and  the  Bible ;  or,  the  Biblical  Account  of  Creation  in  the  Light  of 
Modern  Science.  Printed  among  the  Papers  of  the  Sixth  General  Conference  of  the 
Evangelical  Alliance,  New  York,  1873. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  547 

poem,  "The  Inspired  Psalm  of  Creation."  This  may  be  called  the 
Idealistic  method  of  interpretation.'  "It  is  enough,"  says  Mr. 
Rorison,  "  if  the  Bible  opens  with  a  divinely  illuminated  survey  of 
creation  such  as  readily  assimilates  the  results  of  that  research  it 
was  never  meant  to  supersede  or  forestall."  "  Respect  the  paral- 
lelism," he  urges ;  "  cease  to  ignore  the  structure,  allow  for  the 
mystic  significance  of  the  number  seven,  and  all  perplexities  vanish. 
The  two  groups  of  days  are  each  perfectly  regular,  when  group,  in 
its  integrity,  is  collated  with  group;  neither  ti'iad,  if  it  is  to  exhaust 
its  own  aspect  of  creation,  can  afibrd  to  part  with  or  dislocate  any 
of- its  members;  and  the  second  triad,  as  a  whole,  is  rightly  and  of 
necessity  second,  as  the  fii'st  is  rightly  and  of  necessity  first.  And 
yet  it  is  self-evident  that  if,  for  any  reason,  we  trisect  or  break  up 
the  groups,  the  true  continuation  of  day  one  is  not  day  two,  but 
day  four;  of  day  two,  not  day  three,  but  day  five;  of  day  three,  not 
day  four,  but  day  six.  And  thus  the  '  days '  themselves  are  trans- 
figured from  registers  of  time  into  definitives  of  strophes  or  stanzas 
— lamps  and  landmarks  of  a  creative  sequence — a  mystic  drapery, 
a  parabolic  setting — shadowing  by  the  sacred  cycle  of  seven  the 
truths  of  an  ordered  progress,  a  foreknown  finality,  an  achieved 
perfection,  and  a  divine  repose." 

Here  we  are  carried  out  of  a  narrative  of  facts  and  introduced 
into  a  realm  of  fancy.  Even  days  are  "transfigured"  pg^jj^jf^j  ^j^^j 
into  some  ideal  conceptions  that  no  common  mind  will  unsound  ese- 
find  it  easy  to  grasp,  and  the  whole  array  of  "lamps  ^^^^^' 
and  landmarks,"  "  mystic  drapery,"  and  "  parabolic  setting  "  are  ac- 
knowledged to  be  only  "  shadows"  that  may  "  assimilate  "  the  results 
of  scientific  research.  This  writer  points  out  the  artistic  form  of  the 
record,  which  he  calls  a  poem,  and  refers  also  to  the  similar  artistic 
structure  of  the  Decalogue  and  the  Lord's  Prayer;  but  would  he 
aflirm  that  those  inimitable  compositions  are  not  to  be  literally 
understood?  The  mere  correspondency,  so  often  pointed  out,  of 
the  work  of  the  first  day  to  that  of  the  fourth,  and  of  the  second  to 
the  fifth,  and  of  the  third  to  the  sixth,  does  not  by  any  means  make 
the  passage  a  poem;  nor  does  the  six  times  repeated  "there  was 
evening  and  there  was  morning,"  constitute  any  proper  Hebrew 
parallelism.  If  such  artificiality  of  structure  be  a  reason  for  re- 
garding the  whole  as  a  "  mystic  drapery,"  merely  indicative  "  of  an 
ordered  progress,  a  foreknown  finality,  an  achieved  perfection,  and 
a  divdne  repose,"  the  genealogy  of  the  fifth  chapter  may  be  resolved 
into  a  similar  "  shadowing,"  for  its  structure  is  exceedingly  regular, 

*  See  especially  the  essay  of  the  Rev.  G.  Rorison,  entitled  the  Creative  "Week,  in  Re- 
plies to  Essays  and  Reviews. 


548  PRINCIPLES   OP 

and  the  record  of  every  name  closes  with  the  solemn  refrain — "  and 
he  died."  But  every  thorough  Hebrew  scholar  knows  that  in  all  the 
Old  Testament  there  is  not  to  be  found  a  more  simple,  straightfor- 
ward prose  narrative  than  this  first  chapter  of  Genesis.  Prof. 
Strong  has  well  said  that  it  "  lacks  every  element  of  acknowledircd 
Hebrew  poetry.  In  form  it  has  neither  the  lyrical  prosody  of  the 
Psalms,  nor  the  epic  structure  of  Job;  neither  the  dithyrambic 
march  of  the  prophets,  nor  the  idyllic  colloquies  of  the  Canticles, 
nor  even  the  didactic  collocations  of  the  Proverbs  and  Ecclesiastes. 
...  As  to  sentiment,  it  lacks  that  lofty  moral  tone,  that  fine  play 
of  the  imagination,  that  abrupt  change  of  subject  and  field,  which, 
even  when  other  criteria  fail,  serve  to  indicate  the  rhapsodies  of 
the  Hebrew  bards.  .  .  .  Even  Mr.  Rorison  fails  to  point  out  in  its 
body  the  requisite  artistic  constructiveness,  or  in  its  spirit  the  fire 
of  genius  essential  to  all  poetic  effusions.  Almost  any  descriptive 
portion  of  the  Old  Testament  would  be  found  to  exceed  it  in  these 
respects  if  carefully  analyzed.  The  very  next  chapter  of  Genesis 
is  fully  as  poetical,  whether  in  regard  to  its  topics,  its  style,  or  its 
composition;  and  thus,  by  the  same  loose,  unscientific  process,  we 
might  (as  many  would  fain  do)  reduce  the  accounts  of  Adam's  spe- 
cific formation,  of  a  local  Eden,  and  of  the  origin  of  human  deprav- 
ity, to  poetic  legends.  Just  criticism  forbids  such  a  distortion  of 
prose  to  accommodate  speculative  preconception."  ' 

Let  us  now  inquire  Avhat  a  simple  grammatico-historical  interpre- 
tation of  the  Mosaic  narrative  most  obviously  indicates.  Few,  if 
any,  will  deny  that  the  entire  description  is  adapted  to  impress  the 
reader  with  a  feeling  that  the  creation  here  recorded  was  sublimely 
miraculous.  "VVe  should,  then,  give  strict  attention  to  the  primary 
signification  of  the  terms  employed. 

*  Cyclopaedia  of  Biblical,  Theological,  and  Ecclesiastical  Literature,  article  Cosmology. 
At  the  beginning  of  his  essay  Mr.  Rorison  furnishes  us  with  the  following  sound  and 
excellent  observations :  "  There  is  no  attaining  a  satisfactory  view  of  the  mutual  rela- 
tions of  science  and  Scripture  till  men  make  up  their  minds  to  do  violence  to  neither, 
and  to  deal  faithfully  with  both.  .  .  .  We  ought  to  harbour  no  hankering  after  so- 
•called  'reconciliations,'  or  allow  these  to  warp  in  the  very  least  our  rendering  of  the 
record.  It  is  our  business  to  keep  our  ears  open  to  what  the  Scripture  says,  not 
exercise  our  ingenuity  on  what  it  can  be  made  to  say.  .  .  .  Those  who  seek  the 
repose  of  truth  had  best  banish  from  the  quest  of  it,  in  whatever  field,  the  spirit  and 
tlie  methods  of  sophistry.  The  geologist,  for  example,  if  loyal  to  his  science,  will 
marshal  his  facts  as  if  there  were  no  Book  of  Genesis.  Even  so  is  it  the  duty  of  the 
interpreter  of  the  Mosaic  text  to  fix  [ascertain?]  its  sense  and  investigate  its  struct- 
ure as  though  it  were  susceptible  of  neither  collation  nor  collision  with  any  science  of 
geology."  Tlie  marvel  is,  that  having  acknowledged  such  sound  principles  of  inter- 
pretation, tliis  wiiter  should  have  gone  on  to  construct  one  of  the  most  fanciful  ex- 
positions to  be  found  in  all  tlie  literature  of  the  subject  iu  hand. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  549 

The  words  "  heavens  and  earth  "  are  so  commonly  lased  among  us 
moderns  to  denote  the  astronomic  heavens,  and  the  "Heavens  and 
earth  considered  as  a  planet  or  globe,  that  interpreters  ^^^^  ^"^  ^^ 
have  too  generally  overlooked  the  fact  that,  according  quendi. 
to  the  usus  loquendi  of  the  Hebrew  language,  D^DC*  and  fix  mean 
simply  sJcy  and  la7id.  In  verse  8  it  is  said  that  God  called  the  ex- 
panse D^^p' — heavens,  and  a  comparison  of  other  passages,  where  the 
word  occurs,  will  show  that  it  commonly  and  almost  universally 
denotes  the  ethereal  space  above  us  in  which  the  sun,  moon,  and 
stars  appear  to  move,  from  which  the  rain  falls,  and  through  which 
the  birds  fly  (comp.  Gen.  i,  14,  15,  IV,  20,  26,  28,  30;  ii,  19,  20;  vi, 
V-17;  vii.  3-11;  viii,  2,  etc.).  When  occasionally  used  of  the  abode 
of  God  it  arises  from  the  natural  conception  of  him  as  the  Most 
High,  who  is  exalted  above  the  heavens  (Psalms  Ivii,  5-11;  cxiii, 
4-6).  We  are  further  told,  in  verse  10,  that  God  called  the  dry 
ground  f'^^? — Imid.  This  familiar  word  nowhere  denotes  the  cubic 
contents  of  the  earth  considered  as  a  globe.  Such  a  conception 
never  appears  to  have  entered  the  Hebrew  mind.  The  word  pN 
occurs  over  three  hundred  times  in  the  Book  of  Genesis  alone,  and 
in  most  of  those  places  cannot  have  any  other  meaning  than  land, 
an  area  of  ground,  a  region  or  section  of  country.  Furthermore, 
the  word  N^li,  to  create,  does  not,  according  to  Hebrew  usus  locjuendi, 
signify  the  original  production  of  the  material  or  substance  of  that 
which  is  brought  into  being.  This  is  merely  the  notion  of  some 
modern  Avi-iters.  In  Gen.  i,  21,  the  word  is  applied  to  the  bringing 
forth  of  creatures  which  are  expressly  said  to  have  been  produced 
from  the  waters,  and  in  verse  27  it  is  used  of  man  who  was  formed 
in  part  of  the  dust  of  the  ground  (comp.  Gen.  v,  2).  According  to 
both  Gesenius  and  Ftirst,  the  radical  signification  of  i«"J3  is  that  of 
cutting,  carving,  and  separating.  We  may,  therefore,  properly 
understand  it,  in  Gen,  i,  1 ,  as  denoting  the  forming  or  construction, 
out  of  pre-existing  material,  of  the  heavens  and  the  land  contem- 
plated in  the  biblical  narrative  of  "the  beginning." 

The  natural  meaning  of  these  words,  then,  should  suggest  to  the 
interpreter  that  in  the  opening  chapters  of  Genesis  he  The  first  o^ 
is  not  to  look  for  a  universal  cosmogony.  The  heavens  un°ersai° tos- 
and  land  of  these  chapters  are  the  visible  sky  and  coun-  mogony. 
try  where  the  first  human  pair  were  created.  The  various  species 
of  vegetable  and  animal  life  which  were  brought  forth  on  that 
land,  or  to  multiply  in  those  heavens  and  waters,  w^ere  such  as  were 
there  to  serve  some  interest  of  man,  and  he  was  to  have  dominion 
over  them.  The  primeval  darkness  on  the  face  of  the  deep  need 
not  be  supposed  to   have  been  other  than  local   and  temporary. 


550  PRINCIPLES   OF 

Dense  mists,  hiding  sun,  moon,  and  stars  from  view  for  many  days, 
and  shrouding  all  things  in  utter  gloom,  have  not  unfrequently 
covered  a  large  portion  of  the  earth's  surface  (comp.  Acts  xxvii,  20), 
The  light  of  the  first  three  days  of  the  biblical  narrative  appears  to 
have  been  local  and  miraculous,  like  that  which  was  in  the  dwell- 
ings of  Israel  when  dense  darkness  covered  all  the  rest  of  Egypt 
(Exod.  X,  23).  The  setting  of  the  luminaries  in  the  expanse  on  the 
fourth  day  was  phenomenal;  not  a  primordial  creation,  but  what 
was  apparent  from  the  land  of  Eden.  What  had  taken  jjlace  on 
any  other  portion  of  the  terrestrial  globe,  or  what  classes  of  living 
creatures  may  have  elsewhere  existed  before  or  at  the  time  of  this 
beginning  of  human  history,  are  questions  with  which  the  sacred 
writer  was  not  at  all  concerned.  A  region  no  larger  than  any  one 
of  several  islands  of  Malaysia  would  have  been  ample  for  the  his- 
tory of  the  whole  human  race  before  the  flood.  That  land,  how- 
ever, may  have  been  a  portion  of  one  of  the  existing  continents, 
then  for  the  first  time  elevated  above  the  waters.  The  language 
used  would  apply  equally  well  to  any  limited  region,  whether  of  a 
continent,  a  peninsula,  or  an  island.'  The  simplest  and  most  natural 
meaning  of  the  narrative  is  that  God  at  first  uj^heaved  such  a  land 
from  under  the  waters  of  the  deep,  and,  subsequently,  when  all 
flesh  had  corrupted  its  way  (Gen.  vi,  12),  he  broke  up  the  fountains 
of  the  great  deep  and  submerged  that  region  with  all  its  teeming 
tribes.  At  the  subsidence  of  the  deluge  the  ark  rested,  not  again 
in  Eden,  but  on  the  mountain  of  Ararat  (Gen.  viii,  4),  from  which 
region  the  sons  of  Noah  spread  abroad.  The  original  Eden  may 
have  been  obliterated  by  the  flood,  but  the  names  of  its  countries 
and  rivers  would  very  naturally  have  been  transferred  to  the  new 
land  and  rivers  discovered  and  occupied  by  the  sons  of  Noah. 

'  John  Pye  Smith,  a  generation  ago,  in  his  work  on  The  Relation  between  the  Holy 
Scriptures  and  some  Parts  of  Geological  Science  (4th  edition,  London,  1848),  showed 
by  a  variety  of  evidence  "  that  there  must  have  been  separate  original  creations,  per- 
haps at  different  and  respectively  distant  epochs  "  (p.  40).  lie  also  maintained  that 
a  strict  interpretation  of  the  language  of  Genesis  required  no  wider  application  of  its 
terms  than  to  "  the  part  of  our  world  which  God  was  adapting  for  the  dwelling  of 
man  and  the  animals  connected  with  him.  Of  the  spheroidal  figure  of  the  earth  it  is 
evident  that  the  Hebrews  had  not  the  most  distant  conception."  He  understood  the 
land  of  Gen.  i  to  be  only  "  a  portion  of  the  surface  of  the  earth,  adjusted  and  furnished 
for  most  glorious  purposes,  in  which  a  newly  formed  creation  should  be  the  object  of 
those  manifestations  of  the  authority  and  grace  of  the  Most  Iligli,  which  shall  to 
eternity  show  forth  his  perfections  above  all  other  methods  of  their  ilisplay  "  (p[).  189, 
190).  He  conceived  this  portion  of  the  earth  "  to  have  been  a  part  of  Asia  lying  be- 
tween the  Caucasian  ridge,  the  Caspian  Sea,  and  Tartary  on  the  nortli,  the  Persian 
and  Indian  seas  on  the  south,  and  the  high  mountain  ridges  which  run  at  considerable 
distances  on  the  eastern  and  the  western  flank." 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  551 

It  would  be  manifestly  unfair  to  say  that  an  exposition  of  Gene- 
sis on  so  limited  a  scale  is  but  another  hypothesis  as  tms  expiana- 
f utile  as  the  Geological,  the  Cosmolosjcical,  or  the  Ideal-  "°?  "f  ^t!?\* 

t3         '  .  .    '         .       .  not  a  hypothet- 

istic.     For  let  it  be  observed  that  it  rests,  as  its  principal  icai  theory,  but 

T    •        £  J.  .    •    .  i-i,-j.a  strictly  nat- 

olaim  tor  acceptance,  upon  a  strict  grammatico-histor-  ^-ai  interpre- 
ical  interpretation  of  the  language  of  the  sacred  writer,  ta^tioii. 
Moreover,  it  accords  most  perfectly  with  the  scope  and  plan  of  the 
entire  Book  of  Genesis.  We  have  shown  above  (pp.  211,  212)  how 
the  author  prefaces  his  tenfold  history  of  generations  with  an  ac- 
count of  the  creation  of  the  land  where  the  first  man  appeared; 
and  Gen,  i,  1,  is,  properly,  the  heading  of  that  prefatory  narrative, 
just  as  each  of  the  ten  subsequent  sections  has  its  appropriate  title. 
It  is  incorrect  to  say,  as  some  have  done,  that  the  first  chapter  is  a 
narrative  of  the  universal  creation,  and  the  second  chapter  an  ac- 
count of  Eden  and  Paradise.  A  discriminating  analysis  shows  that 
chapters  i-ii,  3,  is  the  narrative  of  the  beginning,  or  creatio7i  of  the 
heavens  and  land,  and  chapters  ii,  4-iv,  26,  a  record  of  the  genera- 
tions (or  evolutions)  of  the  same  heavens  and  land,  dating  from 
the  day  when  the  Edenic  growths  began.' 

Setting  aside  the  assumption,  therefore,  that  the  first  of  Genesis 
is  an  outline  of  universal  cosmogony,  and  following  the  simple 
grammatico-historical  sense  of  the  language,  we  find  a  more  natural 
exposition  of  what  has  so  sadly  perplexed  the  harmonists.  All 
grounds  of  controversy  between  science  and  the  Bible  are  at  once 
removed.''  The  first  of  Genesis  describes  a  local  and  limited  crea- 
tion. How  large  a  region  it  affected,  and  where  that  land  was 
situated,  are  questions  that  now  admit  of  no  answer.  It  is  the 
record  of  a  sevenfold  miracle,  projected  by  a  well-defined  plan  and 
order  through  the  first  week  of  historic  time.  It  furnishes  the  les- 
sons  of  a  personal  God,  the  eternal,  the  all-wise,  the  omnipotent, 
and  thus  stands  opposed  to  polytheism  and  pantheism.  It  exhibits 
God  as  the  Creator,  the  great  First  Cause  of  things.  It  shows  how 
matter  is  his  creature,  and  subject  to  his  will,  and  how  life — vege- 
table, animal,  and  spiritual  —  originates  with  him.  It  shows  an 
orderly  progress  from  lower  to  higher,  and  the  correspondency 
between  the  work  of  the  two  triads  of  days  serves  to  illusti-ate 
the  Avisdom  and  the  knowledge  of  God.  It  may  be  that  the  six 
days  of  creative  procedure  here  narrated  are  typical  of  correspond- 
ing ages  of  cosmical  development,  and  a  wider  and  more  complete 

1  See  further  on  pp.  56*7,  568. 

^  That  is,  the  science  which  allows  the  possibility  of  miracles.  With  that  infidel 
science,  which  spurns  the  thought  of  a  miraculous  creation,  the  evangelical  inter- 
preter can  have  no  argument  on  the  Mosaic  narrative. 


553  PRINCIPLES   OF 

induction  of  facts  may  yet  confirm  this  supposition.  But  even  if 
now  confirmed,  it  would  not  add  essentially  to  the  great  lessons  of 
order  and  progress  furnished  by  the  literal  interpretation  of  the 
biblical  record.  For  it  does  not  follow  that  God  must  have  created 
or  developed  each  part  of  the  whole  universe  in  the  same  manner. 
There  were  doubtless  other  beginnings,  and  there  are  probably  in- 
numerable forms  of  life  and  ranks  and  orders  of  living  creatures  in 
other  spheres  which  no  descendant  of  Adam  has  ever  been  able  to 
discover,  and  which  it  is  no  purpose  of  the  Bible  to  reveal.  Let 
it  be  once  conceded  that  God  literally  and  miraculously  formed  the 
Eden-land  and  sky,  and  all  that  they  contained,  in  the  manner  de- 
scribed in  Genesis,  and  it  necessarily  follows  a  fortiori  that  he  also 
must  be  the  absolute  and  universal  Creatoi*.  And  if  the  noble  lessons 
above  indicated  are  taught,  as  Mr.  Rorison  thmks,  in  a  grand  cos- 
mological  poem,  whose  artistic  periods  mean  anything  or  eveiy- 
thing  in  general,  and  nothing  in  particular,  how  much  more  forcibly 
are  they  taught  in  a  historical  record  of  literal  fact. 

Rightly  to  interpret  the  Mosaic  narrative,  therefore,  it  is  neces- 
No  valid  pre-  sary  to  disabuse  our  minds  of  the  assumption  that  it 
rumite/^creS  ^^  a  revelation  of  the  primordial  origin  of  the  universe. 
Won.  How  and  when  God  originated  matter,  and  what  were 

the  first  forms  and  modes  of  life — whether  of  plants,  insects,  rep- 
tiles, fish,  foAvls,  beasts,  cattle,  or  angels — it  appears  not  the  pur- 
pose of  revelation  to  inform  us;  but  this  beginning  of  the  Bible 
does  inform  us  of  the  miraculous  creation  of  man  in  the  image  of 
God.  If  to  some  minds,  familiar  with  cosmological  conceptions,  it 
seems  to  belittle  the  biblical  creation  to  confine  it  to  a  limited  por- 
tion of  the  earth,  let  it  be  considered  whether  the  plagues  of  Egypt 
were  belittled  by  being  confined  solely  to  the  land  of  the  Nile. 
Was  it  no  sublime  and  impressive  miracle  that  when  oppressive 
darkness  covered  Egypt  for  three  days  light  filled  the  dwellings 
of  Israel  in  the  land  of  Goshen  ?  Does  it  detract  from  the  life  and 
mighty  works  of  Jesus  that  they  were  confined  to  the  little  land  of 
Canaan?  Was  the  judgment  of  the  deluge  less  signal  because 
confined  to  only  a  portion  of  the  globe  ?  As  a  more  careful  atten- 
tion to  the  usage  of  Hebrew  terms  has  led  nearly  all  modern  exe- 
getes  to  abandon  the  notion  that  the  Noachic  deluge  was  universal, 
so  we  believe  a  closer  study  of  the  Hebrew  text  of  Genesis  i  and  ii 
will  set  aside  the  idea  that  those  chapters  were  designed  to  furnish 
a  universal  cosmogony.  To  have  prefaced  the  account  of  the  crea- 
tion of  man  with  a  description  of  the  origin  of  the  entire  universe 
might  have  been  as  much  out  of  place  as  to  have  introduced  the 
Oospel  of  Jesus  with  a  history  of  all  the  angels  of  God. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  553 


CHAPTER  XXXII. 

HARMONY    AND    DIVERSITY    OP    THE   GOSPELS. 

The  life  of  Jesus  forms  a  turningpoint  in  the  history  of  the  world. 
The  Oljl  Testament  Scriptures  show  the  steady  trend  The  life  of  Je- 
of  history  toward  that  eventful  epoch.  The  prophets  pointinhumfu 
with  one  voice  place  the  coming  of  the  Christ  "  in  the  history. 
end  of  the  days"  (Gen.  xlix,  1;  Num.  xxiv,  14;  Isa.  ii,  2;  Dan.  x,  14), 
and  conceive  his  advent  and  reign  as  the  ushering  in  of  a  new  age. 
The  God  of  the  projjhets  spoke,  in  the  last  days  of  the  old  aeon,  in 
the  person  of  his  incarnate  Son,  "  whom  he  made  heir  of  all  things^ 
through  whom  also  he  made  the  ages  "  (rovg  alcbvag,  the  ceons,  Heb. 
i,  2).  The  death  and  consequent  exaltation  of  Jesus  were  the 
crucial  hour  of  the  world's  history  (John  xii,  23-33),  and  from  that 
hour  there  was  a  new  depai'ture  in  the  (-ourse  of  human  affairs. 
After  the  Gospel  of  the  Messianic  kingdom  had  been  preached  in 
the  whole  Roman  world,  for  a  witness  to  all  the  nations  of  the 
same  (Matt,  xxiv,  14),  the  end  of  that  age  came.  For  it  was  neces- 
sary, before  the  old  economy  came  to  its  decisive  end,  that  the  new 
Gospel  should  first  obtain  a  sure  standing  in  the  Avorld.  The  utter 
overthrow  of  the  Jewish  polity  and  state,  and  the  awful  ruin  of 
that  wicked  city  where  the  Lord  was  crucified,  marked  the  consum- 
mation of  that  aeon.  And  from  that  point  onward  the  triumphs  of 
the  cross  extend.  It  is  but  natural,  therefore,  that  the  four  gos- 
pels, being  the  authoritative  records  of  the  life  and  words  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  are  esteemed  the  most  precious  documents  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

Each  of  the  four  gospels  presents  us  with  a  life  picture  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  and  assumes  to  tell  what  he  did  and  what  xne  Gospels  the 
he  said.     But  while  narratinsr  many  things  in  common,   chief  ground 

o  J  o  of  conflict  be- 

these  four  witnesses  differ  much  from  one  another,  tween  faith 
How  to  account  for  so  many  differences  in  the  midst  of  ^'^'^  unbehef. 
so  many  coincidences  has  always  been  a  j^erplexing  study  among 
expositors.  In  modern  times  the  rationalistic  critics  have  pointed 
to  the  apparent  discrepancies  of  the  gospels  as  evidences  against 
their  credibility,  and  these  most  cherished  records  of  the  Church 
have  become  the  central  point  of  controversy  between  faith  and 
unbelief.  The  rationalists  all  concede  that  the  man  Jesus  lived  and 
died,  but  that  he  rose  again  from  the  dead,  according  to  the  gospels. 


554  PRINCIPLES   OF 

they  stoutly  deny,  and  resort  to  all  manner  of  conjectures  to 
account  for  the  uniform  and  universal  faith  of  the  Church  in  his 
resurrection.  The  common  sense  of  all  Christendom  logically  con- 
cludes that  if  Jesus  Christ  arose  from  the  dead  that  miracle  at  once 
confirms  the  credibility  of  the  gospels,  and  accounts  for  the  marvel- 
lous rise,  the  excellency  and  present  power,  of  the  Christian  religion. 
It  proves  that  its  origin  was  supernatural  and  divine.  But  if  the 
miracle  of  Christ's  resurrection  be  a  falsehood,  the  entire  Christian 
system,  which  rests  upon  it,  is  a  stupendous  fraud.  "Well  might 
Paul  write:  "If  Christ  has  not  been  raised,  vain  then  is  our  preach- 
ing, vain  also  your  faith,  and  we  are  found  even  false  witnesses  of 
God,  because  we  witnessed  respecting  God  that  he  raised  up  the 
Christ"  (I  Cor.  xv,  U,  15). 

Many  writers,  ancient  and  modern,  have  undertaken  to  construct 
Attempts  at  a  (so-called)  Harmony  of  the  Gospels.'  They  have  adopted 
roT'^Tna' -  "^'3,rious  methods  of  explaining  the  several  discrepancies, 
monies.  and  of  Constructing  one  harmonious  nari'ative  out  of  the 

four  different  accounts  of  the  life  of  Christ.  Eusebius  compiled  an 
arrangement  of  the  gospels  in  ten  canons  or  tables,  according  as 
the  different  events  are  related  by  one  or  more  of  the  evangelists. 
Thus,  under  one  head  he  brought  those  passages  that  are  common 
to  all  the  gospels;  under  another  those  that  are  found  only  in  one 
gospel;  in  three  other  tables  he  exhibited  those  facts  which  are 
common  to  any  three  of  the  gospels,  and  in  five  others  those  that 
are  common  to  any  two.  At  a  later  period  effort  was  directed  more 
to  the  combining  of  the  four  gospels  into  one  chronological  order, 
and  then  the  great  question  arose,  Which  of  the  evangelists  gives 
us  the  true  order  of  events  ?  Some  maintained  that  all  four  gos- 
pels give  the  events  of  the  Lord's  life  in  their  true  chronological 
order,  and  wherever  the  events  are  arranged  differently  by  different 
writers  we  should  understand  that  the  transactions  in  question  oc- 
curred more  than  once.  Others  strenuously  maintained  that  chrono- 
logical order  is  not  observed  by  any  of  the  evangelists,  while  others 
were  uncertain  which  particular  evangelist  is  the  best  chronologi- 
cal guide,  some  preferring  Matthew's  arrangement,  others  Luke's, 
inasmuch  as  he  professes  to  set  forth  things  in  their  true  order 
(Ka^e^rjg,  Luke  i,  3).     Cartwright  follows  the  arrangement  of  Mark, 

'  The  most  valuable  works  on  the  Harmony  of  the  Gospels  are  those  of  J.  Macknight 
(London,  1756),  W.  Newcome,  in  Greek  (Dublin,  1778),  and  English  (1802),  G.  Town- 
send  (London,  1825),  edited  by  T.  W.  Coit  (Boston,  1837),  E.  Rol)inson,  in  Greek 
(Boston,  1845),  and  English  (1846),  J.  Strong,  in  English  (New  York,  1852),  and 
Greek  (1854),  W.  Stroud,  in  Greek  (London,  1853),  Tischendorf,  S\Tiopsis  Eviingelica 
(New  edition,  Leipsic,  1864),  F.  Gardiner,  in  Greek  and  English  (Andover,  1871). 


■     BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  555 

and  John's  Gospel,  having  comparatively  few  things  in  common 
with  the  others,  is  generally  believed  to  present  the  true  chronolog- 
ical order  of  the  matters  it  records. 

The  harmonists  have  furnished  many  valuable  expositions,  to- 
gether with  many  solutions  of  the  alleged  discrei^ancies  use  of  Harmo- 
of  the  gospels.  But  as  far  as  they  have  attempted  to  '^®^- 
combine  the  four  gospels  into  one  continuous  narrative,  and  settle 
positively  the  exact  chronological  order  of  events,  they  have  rather 
hindered  than  helped  a  satisfactory  understanding  of  these  price- 
less records.  Such  a  process  brings  these  lifelike  and  independent 
narratives  to  a  test  they  were  never  meant  to  meet,  and  assumes  a 
standard  of  judgment  that  is  both  unscientific  and  unfair.  But 
most  of  the  later  harmonists  concede  that  it  was  no  purpose  of  the 
evangelists  to  compose  a  complete  account  of  the  life  and  works  of 
Jesus,  and  that  all  of  them  record  some  things  without  strict  regard 
to  the  order  of  time.  "  The  true  use  of  harmonies,"  says  J.  A. 
Alexander,  "is  threefold:  exegetical,  historical,  and  apologetical. 
By  mere  juxtaposition,  if  judicious,  the  gospels  may  be  made  to 
throw  light  upon  each  other's  obscure  places.  By  combination — not 
mechanical,  but  rational;  not  textual,  but  interpretative — harmonies 
put  it  in  our  power  not  to  grind,  or  melt,  or  boil  four  gospels  into 
one,  but  out  of  the  four,  kept  apart,  yet  viewed  together,  to  extract 
one  history  for  ourselves.  And,  lastly,  by  the  endless  demonstra- 
tion of  the  possible  solutions  of  apparent  or  alleged  discrej^ancies, 
even  where  we  may  not  be  prepared  to  choose  among  them,  they 
reduce  the  general  charge  of  falsehood  or  of  contradiction,  not  only 
ad  absitrdum,  but  to  a  palj^able  impossibility.  How  can  four  inde- 
pendent narratives  be  false  or  contradictory  which  it  is  possible  to 
reconcile  on  so  many  distinct  hypotheses?  The  art  of  the  most 
subtle  infidelity  consists  in  hiding  this  convincing  argument  behind 
the  alleged  necessity  of  either  giving  a  conclusive  and  exclusive 
answer  to  all  captious  cavils  and  apparent  disagreements,  or  aban- 
donin'g  our  faith  in  the  history  as  a  whole.  This  most  important 
end  of  gospel  harmonies  has  been  accomplished."  * 

An  intelligent  and  profitable  study  of  the  gospels  requires  atten- 
tion especially  to  three  things:  (1)  Their  origin;  (2)  The  Three  consid- 
distinct  plan  and  purpose  of  each  gospel,  and  (3)  The  erations. 
marked  characteristics  of  the  several  gospels.  These  considera- 
tions, leading  as  they  do  to  a  proper  understanding  of  the  gospel 
records,  and  to  the  solution  of  their  discrepancies,  are  really  so 
many  hermeneutical  principles  to  be  applied  in  any  thorough  ex- 
position of  these  records. 
*  Article  on  Harmonies  of  the  Gospels  in  the  Princeton  Review,  vol.  xxviii,  p.  105. 


556  PRINCIPLES    OF 

The  most  cursory  examination  of  the  four  gospels  must  show  the 
Origin  of  the  obsei'vant  critic  that  they  are  not,  in  any  proper  sense. 
Gospels.  formal  histories.     Nor  do  they  assume  to  be  complete 

biographies.  There  is,  really,  nothing  like  them  in  the  Avhole 
range  of  literature.  They  manifestly  sprung  from  a  common 
source,  and  they  all  agree  in  recording  more  or  less  of  the  life, 
words,  works,  death,  and  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ.  But  Avhether 
that  common  source  were  written  documents  or  oral  traditions  has 
long  been  a  matter  of  controversy.  Some  have  maintained  the 
existence  of  an  original  gospel  in  Hebrew  or  Aramaic ;  others  an 
original  gospel  in  Greek;  while  others  have  supposed  the  earlier  writ- 
ten gospel  was  supplemented  by  apostolical  traditions.'  But  tlie 
hypothesis  of  an  oral  gospel,  embodying  the  substance  of  the  apos- 
tolic preaching,  is  now  very  generally  held  as  the  principal  source 
of  our  four  gospels.  "The  hypothesis  of  an  oral  gospel,"  says 
An  original  Westcott,  "is  most  Consistent  with  the  general  habit 
oral  Gospel.  Qf  ^jjg  Jews  and  the  peculiar  habit  of  the  apostles;  it  is 
supported  by  the  earliest  direct  testimony,  and  in  some  degree  im- 
plied in  the  apostolic  writings.  The  result  of  the  examination  of 
the  internal  character  of  the  gospels  is  not  less  favourable  to  its 
adoption  than  the  weight  of  external  evidence.  The  general  form 
of  the  Gospels  points  to  an  oral  source.  A  minute  biography,  or  a 
series  of  annals,  which  are  the  simplest  and  most  natural  forms  of 
writing,  are  the  least  natural  forra^  of  tradition,  and  the  farthest 
removed  from  the  evangelical  narratives,  which  consist  of  striking 
scenes  and  discourses,  such  as  must  have  lived  long  in  tlie  memories 
of  those  who  witnessed  them.  Nor  are  the  gospels  fashioned  only 
on  an  oral  type;  they  are  fashioned  also  upon  that  type  which  is 
preserved  in  the  other  apostolic  writings.  The  oral  gospel,  as  far 
as  it  can  be  traced  in  the  Acts  and  the  Epistles,  centered  in  the 
crowning  facts  of  the  passion  and  the  resurrection,  Avliile  the  eailier 
ministry  of  the  Lord  was  regarded  chiefly  in  relation  to  its  tiiial 
issue.  In  a  narrative  composed  on  such  a  plan  it  is  evident'  that 
the  record  of  the  last  stage  of  Christ's  work  would  be  conspicuous 
for  detail  and  fulness,  and  that  the  events  chosen  to  represent  the 
salient  features  of  its  earlier  course  would  be  combined  together 
without  special  reference  to  date  or  even  to  sequence.  Viewed  in 
the  light  of  its  end  the  whole  jjcriod  was  one  in  essence,  undivided 

'  For  an  account  of  the  various  theories  of  the  origin  of  the  gospels,  see  Introduc- 
tions to  tlie  New  TcstJinicnt  by  Eicliliorn,  De  Wetto,  Block,  Davidson,  etc.,  and 
Marsh's  Translation  of  Micliaelis'  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  Westcott's  In- 
troduction to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels,  pp.  174-216,  and  the  biblical  dictionaries  and 
cyclopcodias  under  the  word  Gospels. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  557 

by  years  or  festivals,  and  the  record  would  be  marked  not  so  much 
by  divisions  of  time  as  by  groups  of  events.  In  all  these  respects 
the  synoptic  gospels  exactly  represent  the  probable  form  of  the 
first  oral  gospel.  They  seem  to  have  been  shaped  by  the  pressure 
of  recurring  needs,  and  not  by  the  deliberate  forethought  of  their 
authors.  In  their  common  features  they  seem  to  be  that  which  the 
earliest  history  declares  they  are,  the  summary  of  the  apostolic 
preaching,  the  historic  groundwork  of  the  Church."  * 

But  granting  the  earliest  form  of  the  gospel  narrative  to  have 
been  oral,  that  concession  is  far  from  determining  the  no  absolute 
particular  origin  of  our  in'esent  gospels.     And  it  ought  certainty  as  to 

^  ,  ,.  .  V        -ti     *     4-  4.1        the  particular 

to  be  agreed  among  discernmg  critics  that,  from  the  origin  of  each 
nature  of  the  case,  in  the  absence  of  sufficient  evidence,  Gospel. 
no  absolute  certainty  can  be  attained.  How  and  when  Matthew  and 
Mark  wrote,  what  was  the  special  occasion  of  their  writing,  how  far 
they  may  have  used  written  documents,  and  what  understanding  the 
apostles  and  evangelists  may  have  had  among  themselves  about 
writing  down  the  words  and  works  of  their  Lord,  are  all  questions 
which  admit  of  no  positive  answer.  It  is  not  the  province  of  a 
work  on  hermeneutics  to  discuss  the  different  theories  of  the  origin 
of  the  written  gospels,  but  to  define  principles  of  procedure  essen- 
tial to  any  profitable  discussion  of  the  subject.  And  it  is  all  im- 
portant to  bear  in  mind  that  where  absolute  certainty  on  a  given 
question  is  impossible,  dogmatic  assumi:)tions  must  be  avoided,  and 
considerate  attention  should  be  bestowed  upon  any  reasonable  sup- 
positions which  will  heljj  to  elucidate  the  problem.  In  the  absence 
of  external  testimony  the  gospels  themselves,  and  other  New  Test- 
ament books,  may  be  expected  to  suggest  the  best  indications  of 
the  origin  and  aim  of  any  one  of  the  gospels.  It  appears  that  it 
was  regarded  as  an  essential  qualification  for  apostleship  to  have 
seen  the  Lord  (Acts  i,  21,  22;  1  Cor.  ix,  1).  And  is  it  not  every 
way  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  apostles  had  an  understanding 
among  themselves  as  to  what  principal  facts  of  the  Lord's  life 
should  be  embodied  in  their  preaching?  May  it  not  pj-^tj^^^jj^  ^^^ 
have  been  agreed  among  them  that  Matthew  and  John  positions  as  to 
should  each  wi'ite  a  gospel  of  the  Lord?  At  one  time  eirouffin. 
it  was  agreed,  according  to  Paul  (Gal.  ii,  9),  that  James,  Peter,  and 
John  should  go  as  apostles  to  the  Jews,  and  Paul  and  Barnabas  to 
the  Gentiles.  The  council  of  the  apostles  and  elders  at  Jerusalem, 
described  in  Acts  xv,  shows  how  carefully  matters  of  general  inter- 
est to  the  Church  were  discussed  by  the  great  leaders.  Is  it  likely, 
then,  that  so  important  a  matter  as  the  publication  of  authoritative 

1  Introduction  to  the  Gospels,  pp.  212,  213,  Boston,  1862. 


558  PRINCIPLES   OF 

accounts  of  the  Christ  would  have  been  neglected  by  them  ?  There 
was  a  saying  abroad  in  the  Church  that  John  should  not  die  (Jolui 
xxi,  23),  Whatever  its  })recise  meaning,  it  may  have  been  the 
occasion  of  his  putting  off  the  composition  of  his  gospel  until  all 
the  rest  of  the  apostles  had  passed  away.  The  ancient  tradition 
that  Mark's  Gospel  is  essentially  that  of  Peter,  and  Luke's  essen- 
tially that  of  Paul,  is  corroborated  by  their  general  character  and 
form.  With  those  who  accept  the  apostolic  origin  and  divine  in- 
spiration of  the  four  gospels  there  is  no  reasonable  ground  for  deny- 
ing that  these  records  were  put  forth  by  a  common  understanding 
of  the  apostles  and  elders  of  the  Church,  and  for  the  purpose  of 
providing  the  churches  everywhere  with  an  authoritative  testimonj'- 
of  the  life  and  works  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  It  appears  from  Luke's 
preface  (Luke  i,  l)  that  many  persons  took  in  hand,  at  an  early  day, 
to  publish  narratives  of  the  current  oral  gospel,  namely,  the  things 
that  were  looked  upon  as  fully  accomplished  by  God  in  the  person 
of  Jesus,  and  before  the  eyes  of  those  who  were  with  him  from  the 
first.  This  fact  probably  made  it  expedient  that  the  great  events  of 
that  gospel  should  be  set  forth  by  apostolic  authority,  and  when  at 
length  these  four  authoritative  records  went  forth  to  the  churches 
they  supplanted  all  others,  and  have  ever  commended  themselves  to 
the  faith  of  Christian  believers  in  all  lands. 

Further  suggestions  as  to  the  origin  of  the  four  gospels  will 
^. ,.    ,     ,        appear  as  we  proceed  to  inquire  into  the  distinct  plan 

Distinct  plan^^  *  ,i  ^ 

and  purpose  of  and  purpose  of  each.  Is  it  reasonable  to  suppose  that 
each  Gospel.  tJ^gge  gospel  records  were  composed  and  sent  forth 
among  the  early  churches  without  any  definite  plan  and  purpose '? 
Are  they  merely  so  many  collections  of  fragmentary  traditions 
thrown  together  haphazard  ?  When  an  event  recorded  by  one  is 
omitted  by  another,  are  we  to  suppose  that  the  omission  arose 
from  ignoi-ance  of  the  event  ?  To  suppose  the  affirmative  of  any 
one  of  these  questions  would  seem  highly  absurd',  for  each  of  the 
four  gospels  contains  so  many  evidences  of  definite  design,  and  so 
many  inimitable  word-pictures,  that  we  cannot  believe  that  any 
authors,  competent  for  the  writing  of  such  books,  would  have  put 
them  forth  without  orderly  arrangement  and  without  special  pur- 
l)ose.  It  is  far  more  probable  that  each  evangelist  had  a  reason 
for  what  he  omitted  as  well  as  for  what  he  recorded. 

Irenaeus  gives  the  following  account  of  the  gospels:  "Mattliew 
Tradition  of  the  issued  a  written  gospel  among  the  Hebrews  in  their 
early  Church,  own  dialect,  while  Peter  and  Paul  were  preaching  at 
Rome,  and  laying  the  foundation  of  the  Clnirch.  After  their  de- 
parture, Mark,  the  disciple  and  interpreter  of  Peter,  did  also  hand 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  55& 

down  to  us  in  writing  what  had  been  preached  by  Peter.  Luke 
also,  the  companion  of  Paul,  recorded  in  a  book  the  gospel  preached 
by  him.  Afterward,  John,  the  disciple  of  the  Lord,  who  also  had 
leaned  upon  his  breast,  did  himself  publish  a  gospel  during  his  resi- 
dence at  Ephesus  in  Asia."'  With  this  general  statement  of  L"e- 
nseus  all  ancient  history  and  tradition  substantially  agree. 

A  cursory  examination  of  Matthew's  Gospel  will  discover  its 
special  adaptation  to  Jewish  readers.  The  first  verse, 
in  true  Jewish  style,  declares  it  to  be  "  The  Book  of  pel  adapted  to 
the  generation  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  son  of  David,  the  ^  ^^' 
son  of  Abraham."  The  great  purpose  of  this  gospel  throughout  is 
to  exhibit  Jesus  as  the  Messiah  of  whom  the  prophets  had  spoken, 
the  divine  founder  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Hence  he  makes  more 
extensive  and  more  elaborate  use  of  Old  Testament  prophecy  than 
any  other  of  the  evangelists.  These  prominent  features  of  the  first 
gospel  are  certainly  a  fair  indication  of  its  special  purpose. 

The  ancient  tradition  that  Mark's  Gospel  is  substantially  that  of 
Peter,^  is  confirmed  by  the  general  style,  scope,  and  plan 
of  the  gospel  itself.  Peter's  active  and  rapid  manner  adapted  to  the 
would  naturally  dictate  a  condensed  and  pointed  gospel.  -^"^^  ''^^*®- 
His  ministry  to  such  Gentile  converts  as  Cornelius  would  be  likely 
to  show  the  need  of  an  account  of  the  Lord  Jesus  especially  adapted 
to  that  class  of  minds.  Mark's  Gospel  well  meets  this  ideal.  It 
omits  genealogies  and  long  discourses.  It  has  comparatively  few 
citations  from  Old  Testament  prophecy.  It  portrays  the  life  of 
Jesus  as  that  of  a  mighty  conqueror.  It  was  certainly  adapted  to 
meet  the  tastes  of  the  Roman  mind,  whose  ideals  of  rapidity,  power, 
and  triumph  were  well  expressed  in  the  famous  words  of  Caesar,  "  I 
came,  I  saw,  I  conquered." 

Luke's  Gospel,  declared  by  the  voice  of  the  most  ancient  tradition 

'  Against  Heresies,  book  iii,  chap,  i,  1.  That  Matthew's  Gospel  was  originally  writ- 
ten in  Hebrew,  or  Aramgean,  but  early  put  forth  in  Greeis;  by  the  hand  or  under  the 
oversight  of  Matthew  himself,  is  now  the  opinion  of  many  of  the  best  biblical  scholars. 
But  the  arguments  pro  and  con  may  be  seen  in  Meyer,  Commentary  on  Matthew,  In- 
troduction ;  Alford,  Greek  Testament,  Prolegomena ;  Introduction  to  New  Testament 
by  Hug,  De  Wette,  Bleek,  Davidson,  etc.,  and  Biblical  Dictionaries  of  Smith,  Kitto, 
and  M'Clintock  and  Strong. 

^  Eusebius  says  that  Peter,  having  established  the  Gospel  among  the  Romans,  "  so 
greatly  did  the  splendour  of  piety  enlighten  the  minds  of  his  hearers,  that  it  was  not 
sufficient  to  hear  but  once,  nor  to  receive  the  unwritten  doctrine  of  the  Gospel  of  God, 
but  they  persevered  in  every  variety  of  entreaties  to  solicit  Mark,  as  the  companion 
of  Peter,  that  he  should  leave  tliem  a  monument  of  the  doctrines  thus  orally  com- 
municated in  writing.  Nor  did  they  cease  their  solicitations  until  they  had  prevailed 
with  the  man,  and  thus  became  the  means  of  that  history  which  is  called  the  Gospel 
according  to  Mark." — Eccl.  Hist.,  book  ii,  chap,  xv  (Bohn's  Ed.). 


560  PRINCIPLES   OF 

to  be  the  substance  of  Paul's  preaching,'  is  pre-eminently  the 
T.,t„-=  tho  gospel  of  the  Gentiles.  It  deals  more  than  any  other 
Pauline  Gospel  gospel  with  Jesus'  words  and  works  for  the  whole 
to  the  Gent  es.  ^y^j.^^j^  Luke  alone  records  the  mission  of  the  seventy. 
He  alone  records  the  parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan,  and  that  of 
the  Prodigal  Son.  He  narrates  the  journey  and  ministry  in  Peraja, 
a  comparatively  heathen  land.  But  while  adding  many  things  of 
this  kind,  he  also  sets  forth  in  his  own  way  the  main  facts  recorded 
in  Matthew  and  Mark.*  And  the  three  together,  because  of  the 
general  view  they  give  of  the  same  great  outline  of  facts,  are  called 
the  Synoptic  Gospels. 

Not  without  reason  has  the  Gospel  of  Luke  been  believed  to  have 
special  adaptations  to  the  mind  of  the  Greeks.  As  a  mighty  uni- 
versal conqueror  was  the  grand  ideal  of  a  Roman,  so  the  perfection 
of  humanity  was  the  dream  of  the  noblest  Grecian  intellect.  Luke's 
orderly  narrative,  with  all  those  delicate  traits  which  none  but 
the  "beloved  physician"  could  so  well  detail,  is  pre-eminently  the 
gospel  of  the  Son  of  man,  the  gospel  of  universal  redemption.' 

The  Gospel  of  John  has  manifestly  a  specific  design  different 
Joh  'nh  fi'om  that  of  the  other  gospels.     Its  lofty  spiritual  tone, 

ituai  Gospel  of  its  fulness  of  doctrine,  and  its  profound  conceptions  of 
aith.  ^j^g  divinity  of  the  Lord,  arrest  the  attention  of  all 
readers.  "The  Synoptic  Gospels,"  says  Westcott,  "contain  the 
gospel  of  the  infant  Church;   that  of  St.  John  the   gospel  of  its 

'  Irenaeus  Against  Heresies,  iii,  1.  Eusebius,  Eccl.  Hist.,  book  ri,  chap,  xxv,  where 
Origen  is  quoted  as  saying :  "  The  third  Gospel  is  that  according  to  Luke,  the  gospel 
commended  by  Paul,  which  was  written  for  the  converts  from  the  Gentiles." 

^  "  The  Gospel  of  St.  Paul,"  says  Westcott,  "  is,  in  its  essential  characteristics,  the 
complementary  history  to  that  of  St.  Matthew.  The  difference  between  the  two  may 
be  seen  in  their  opening  chapters.  The  first  words  of  the  Hebrew  evangelist  gave  the 
clue  to  his  whole  narrative;  and  so  the  first  chapter  of  St.  Luke,  with  its  declarations 
of  the  blessedness  of  faith,  and  the  exaltation  of  the  lowly,  lead  at  once  to  the  point 
from  which  he  contemplated  the  life  of  Him  who  was  'to  give  light  to  them  that  sit 
in  darkness  and  in  the  shadow  of  death.'  The  perfect  manhood  of  the  Saviour,  and 
the  consequent  mercy  and  universality  of  his  covenant,  is  his  central  subject,  rather 
than  the  temporal  relations  or  eternal  basis  of  Christianity.  In  the  other  gospels  we 
find  our  King,  our  Lord,  our  God ;  but  in  St.  Luke  we  see  the  image  of  our  great 
High  Priest,  'made  perfect  through  suffering,  tempted  in  all  points  as  we  are,  but 
without  sin,'  so  that  each  trait  of  human  feeling  and  natural  love  helps  us  to  complete 
the  outline  and  confirms  its  truthfulness." — Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels, 
pp.  370-372. 

"  See  Da  Costa,  The  Four  Witnesses,  pp.  185-225,  and  Prof.  D.  S.  Gregory,  Why 
Four  Gospels  ?  pp.  207-276.  In  both  these  valuable  works  the  idea  that  Matthew's 
is  the  gospel  for  the  Jew,  Mark's  for  the  Roman,  Luke's  for  the  Greek,  and  John's 
for  the  Church  is  elaborated  with  much  detail  Gregory,  however,  at  some  points, 
carries  the  matter  to  an  undue  extreme. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  561 

maturity.  The  first  combine  to  give  the  wide  experience  of  the 
many ;  the  last  embraces  the  deep  mysteries  treasui-ed  up  by  the 
one.  All  alike  are  consciously  based  on  the  same  great  facts ;  but 
yet  it  is  possible,  in  a  more  limited  sense,  to  describe  the  first  as 
historical,  and  the  last  as  ideal;  though  the  history  necessarily 
points  to  truths  which  lie  beyond  all  human  experience,  and  the 
'ideas'  only  connect  that  which  was  once  for  all  realized  on  earth 
with  the  eternal  of  which  it  was  the  revelation." '  Clement  of 
Alexandi-ia,  as  quoted  by  Eusebius,'^  also  observes :  "  John,  last  of 
all,  perceiving  that  what  had  reference  to  the  body  in  the  gospel 
of  our  Saviour  was  sufficiently  detailed,*  and,  being  encouraged  by 
his  familiar  friends,  and  urged  by  the  Spirit,  he  wrote  a  spiritual 
gospel."  John's  Gospel  is  pre-eminently  the  gospel  of  the  word  of 
God.  It  deals  especially  with  the  mystery  of  God  in  Christ,  and 
sets  forth  the  Lord  as  the  life  of  men  and  the  light  of  the  world. 
It  is  a  revelation  of  the  life  of  faith  in  the  Son  of  God.  It  was  writ- 
ten "  that  ye  may  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God ; 
and  that,  believing,  ye  may  have  life  in  his  name"  (John  xx,  31).^ 

Keeping  in  mind  the  leading  idea  and  aim  of  each  of  the  four 
gospels,  we  may  study  their  several  characteristics  to 

Cli3ir&ct6ristic3 

advantage.  It  will  often  be  found  that  what  at  first  of  the  several 
arrests  attention  as  an  inconsistency  is  an  evidence  of  ^^^"seiists. 
the  scrupulous  fidelity  of  the  evangelist.  What  sceptical  critics 
have  pronounced  unaccountable  omissions  may  be  evidences  of  spe- 
cial design.  The  vivid  portrayal  of  events,  the  little  incidents  true 
to  life,  the  touches  of  pathos,  the  forms  of  expression  which  none 
but  eyewitnesses  of  the  events  could  use,  are  a  mightier  proof  of 
the  credibility  of  the  gospels  than  all  the  alleged  discrepancies  are 
of  their  incredibility. 

Considering  now,  for  example,   the  Gospel  of  Matthew  as  de- 
signed especially  for  Jewish  readers,  how  natural  for  him  Noticeable 
to  announce  it  as  the  book  of  the  generation  of  Jesus  characteristics 
Christ,  the  son  of  David,  the  son  of  Abraham.     How  to   *''M'^"'^^^- 
his  purpose  to  describe  the  birth  of  Jesus,  in  the  days  of  Herod  the 

'  Introduction  to  Gospels,  p.  254.  ^  Ecclesiastical  History,  vi,  14. 

^  Thus  Westcott,  "  The  subject  which  is  announced  in  the  opening  verses  is  realized, 
step  by  step,  in  the  course  of  the  narrative.  The  word  '  came  to  his  own,'  and  they 
'received  him  not;'  but  others  'received  him,'  and  thereby  became  'sons  of  God.' 
This  is  the  theme  which  requires  for  its  complete  treatment,  not  a  true  record  of  events 
or  teaching,  but  a  view  of  the  working  of  both  on  the  hearts  of  men.  The  ethical 
element  is  co-ordinate  with  the  historical ;  and  the  end  which  the  evangelist  proposes 
to  himself  answers  to  this  double  current  of  his  gospel.  He  wrote  that  men  might 
believe  the  fact  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  and  believing — by  spiritual 
fellowship — might  have  life  in  his  name." — Introduction  to  Gospels,  pp.  276,  277. 
36 


563  PRINCIPLES   OF 

king,  as  one  that  was  horn  King  of  the  Jeics,  and  born  in  Bethlehem, 
according  to  the  prophets.  How  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is  pre- 
sented in  one  connected  whole,  as  if  it  were  a  republication  of  the 
ancient  law  of  Sinai  in  a  new  and  better  form.  How  the  series  of 
miracles  in  the  eighth  and  ninth  chapters  follows  as  if  designed  to 
evidence  the  divine  power  and  authority  of  this  new  Lawgiver  and 
King.  The  calling,  ordaining,  and  sending  out  the  twelve  disciples 
(chap,  x)  Avas  like  the  election  of  a  new  Israel  to  reclaim  the  twelve 
tribes  scattered  abroad.  The  seven  parables  of  chap,  xiii  are  a 
revelation  of  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  the  kingdom 
which  he,  as  the  Christ  of  God,  was  about  to  establish.  Then  fol- 
lows ample  record  of  the  conflict  between  this  King  of  the  Jews 
and  the  scribes  and  Pharisees,  who  looked  for  another  kind  of 
Messianic  kingdom  (xiv-xxiii).  The  great  apocalyptic  discourse  of 
chaps,  xxiv  and  xxv  discloses  the  end  of  that  age  as  in  the  near 
future,  and  is  in  striking  analogy  with  the  spirit  and  forms  of  Old 
Testament  prophecy.  The  record  of  the  last  supper,  the  betrayal, 
the  crucifixion,  and  the  resurrection,  completes  the  picture  of  the 
great  Prophet,  Priest,  and  King.  The  entire  book  has  thus  a  unity 
of  purpose  and  of  detail  admirably  adapted  to  be  the  gospel  to  the 
Hebrews,  and  to  show  to  all  the  thoughtful  in  Israel  that  Jesus  was 
indeed  the  Messiah  of  whom  the  prophets  had  spoken.  Moreover, 
while  thus  breathing  the  Hebrew  spirit,  it  has  fewer  explanations 
of  Jewish  customs  than  the  other  gospels. 

Many  have  deemed  it  strange  that  Matthew  says  nothing  about 
Omissions  of  the  first  miracle  of  Jesus,  at  Cana,  or  of  the  healing  at 
peis^nor'\vith-  Capernaum  of  the  nobleman's  son,  or  of  the  resurrec- 
out  a  purpose,  tion  of  Lazarus,  facts  of  such  great  interest.  These 
notable  miracles  are  omitted  in  all  the  synoptic  gospels,  and  some 
have  rushed  to  the  conclusion  that  they  were  unknown  to  Matthew, 
Mark,  and  Luke.  Much  more  reasonable  is  the  suggestion  of  Up- 
ham,  that  in  the  earlier  oral  gospel,  preached  everywhere  by  the 
apostles,  and  rejjresented  in  substance  in  the  synoptic  gos])cls,  it 
was  agreed,  as  a  matter  of  prudence,  to  abstain  from  any  mention 
of  living  persons  who  would  be  exposed  to  peril  by  such  a  publica- 
tion of  their  connexion  with  Jesus.  The  persecution  that  arose 
iipon  the  death  of  Stephen  would  naturally  seek  out  the  relatives 
of  the  hated  Nazarene,  and  any  other  parties  whose  testimony 
mightily  confirmed  the  divine  power  of  Jesus.  The  evangelists  and 
apostles  would  not  needlessly  expose  the  nobleman  or  his  son,  who 
were  probably  still  living  at  Capernaum.  They  would  not  publish 
the  home  of  the  relatives  of  the  mother  of  Jesus,  Avhere  he  wrought 
his  first  miracle,  nor  jeopardize  the  lives  of  Mary  and  Martha  and 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  563 

their  friends  at  Bethany  by  sending  forth  a  publication  likely  to 
intensify  the  feeling  that  was  already  so  violent  against  them/ 

The  above  considerations  are  sufficient  to  set  aside  all  arguments 
against  the  genuineness  and  credibility  of  the  gospels,  which  are 
based  upon  omissions  which  modern  critics  may  deem  strange.  To 
the  beloved  disciple,  John,  who  was  expected  to  outlive  the  others, 
it  was  appropriately  left  to  record  the  fuller  accoimt  of  Jesus' 
Judean  ministry,  and  to  make  mention  of  persons  and  events  of 
whom  it  Avas  inexpedient  to  write  so  fully  at  an  earlier  time.  And 
a  minute  study  of  the  peculiar  characteristics  of  Mark,  Luke,  and 
John,  will  show  that,  both  in  what  they  record  and  in  what  they 
omit,  each  consistently  carries  out  his  own  individual  plan  and 
purpose.''' 

The  inner  and  essential  harmony  of  the  gospels  is  accordingly 
enhanced  by  their  diversity.  These  narratives  consti-  The  harmony 
tute  a  fourfold  witness  of  the  Christ  of  God.  As  broad-  enhancfd^'^by 
minded  philosophers  have  discerned  in  the  national  their  diversity, 
characteristics  and  history  of  the  Jews,  the  Greeks,  and  the  Romans 
a  providential  preparation  of  the  world  for  the  Gospel,  so  in  the 
gospels  themselves  may  be  seen,  in  turn,  a  providential  record  of 
the  world's  Redeemer,  wonderfully  adapted  by  manifold  forms  of 
statement  to  impress  and  convince  the  various  minds  of  men.     We 

1  "Bethany,"  observes  Upham,  "was  one  of  the  suburbs  of  Jerusalem.  The  mir- 
acle there  wrought  was  the  immediate  occasion  of  the  arrest  and  trial  of  Jesus,  though 
the  hatred  of  the  Jews  had  kindled  to  the  heat  of  murder  before  the  raising  of  Laz- 
arus, and  even  the  neighbourhood  of  the  unholy  city  had  become  so  unsafe  that  Jesus 
stayed  on  the  eastern  bank  of  the  Jordan.  While  there  Mary  and  her  sister  Martha 
sent  this  message,  '  Lord,  he  whom  thou  lovest  is  sick.'  And,  when  he  would  go  to 
Bethany,  the  thoughtful  Thomas  said,  '  Let  us  go  and  die  with  him.'  These  words 
disprove  the  notion  that  most  of  the  disciples  were  then  away  from  their  Master ;  his 
•time  was  too  near  for  that;  but  they  do  prove  not  only  the  chivalry  of  St.  Thomas, 
but  his  sagacity.  He  judged  rightly  of  the  peril  of  the  place  and  time ;  for,  as  soon 
as  the  chief  priests  knew  that  Jesus  was  again  so  near,  and  heard  of  what  he  did  at 
Bethany,  they  took  counsel  how  they  might  kill  him. 

"At  that  time  it  was  their  plan  to  kill  Lazarus  also.  Only  St.  John  records  this, 
and  he  does  not  say  how  Lazarus  escaped.  But  such  was  the  wealth  and  rank  of  the 
family  of  Bethany  that  its  love  for  Jesus  greatly  enraged  the  rulers  of  the  Jews ;  and, 
as  Mary  foresaw  the  Lord's  death,  she  may  have  seen  the  danger  of  Lazarus,  and  the 
family  have  had  the  power  to  guard  against  it.  Perhaps  they  did  so  because  of  some 
intimation  from  their  Lord  ;  all  we  know  is,  that  the  Jews  then  failed  to  kill  Lazarus. 
But  such  was  their  purpose  then;  and  this  purpose  would  naturally  revive  in  the 
midst  of  the  provocations  that  led  them  to  murder  St.  Stephen." — Thoughts  on  the 
Holy  Gospels,  pp.  170,  171. 

'  See  these  characteristics  elaborated  in  detail  by  Da  Costa  and  Gregory  in  their 
works  named  above.  Comp.  also  Westcott's  chapter  on  The  Characteristics  of  the 
Gospels,  in  his  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels,  pp.  217-253. 


564  PRINCIPLES   OF 

should  not  say  that  Matthew  wrote  for  the  Jews  only,  Mark  for  the 
Romans,  and  Luke  for  the  Greeks.  That  would  imply  that  when 
these  several  nations  ceased  these  gospels  would  have  no  further 
special  adaptation.  We  shoiild  rather  bear  in  mind  that,  so  far  as 
the  several  gospels  have  the  special  adaptations  named,  they  have 
a  divinely-ordained  fitness  to  make  the  person  and  character  of 
Jesus  the  more  powerfully  impressive  upon  all  classes  of  men.  The 
types  of  mind  and  character  represented  by  those  great  historic 
races  are  ever  appearing,  and  require  perpetually  the  manifold  tes- 
timony of  Jesus  furnished  by  the  four  evangelists.  The  four  are 
better  than  one.  We  need  the  living  picture  of  the  Prince  of  the 
house  of  David  as  given  by  Matthew,  for  it  reveals  him  as  the  per- 
fecter  of  the  old  economy,  the  f ulfiller  of  the  law  and  the  prophets. 
We  need  the  briefer  gospel  of  the  mighty  Son  of  God  as  given  by 
Mark.  Its  rapid  style  and  movement  affect  multitudes  more  deeply 
than  a  gospel  so  fully  imbued  with  the  Old  Testament  spirit  as  that 
of  Matthew.  "  If  in  the  fii'st  gospel,"  observes  Ellicott,  "  we  recog- 
nise transitions  from  theocratic  glories  to  meek  submissions,  in  the 
second  we  see  our  Redeemer  in  one  light  only,  of  majesty  and 
power.  If  in  St.  Matthew's  record  we  behold  now  the  glorified 
and  now  the  suffering^Messiah,  in  St.  Mark's  vivid  pages  we  see 
only  the  all-powerful  Son  of  God;  the  voice  we  hear  is  that  of  the 
Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Judah." '  Luke's  gospel,  on  the  other  hand, 
opens  before  us  the  broader  vision  of  the  Son  of  man,  born,  to  be 
sure,  under  the  law,  but  born  of  a  woman,  "  a  light  for  revelation 
of  the  Gentiles,"  as  Avell  as  for  the  glory  of  Israel  (Luke  ii,  32).  He 
appropriately  traces  the  Redeemer's  lineage  away  back  beyond  Da- 
vid, and  beyond  Abraham,  to  Adam,  the  son  of  God  (Luke  iii,  38). 
This  Pauline  gospel  gives  us  the  living  embodiment  of  the  perfect 
Man,  the  Friend  and  Saviour  of  helpless  humanity.  Not  only  does 
it  offer  the  noblest  ideal  to  the  mind  of  the  Greek;  it  must  alwaj'S 
have  a  charm  for  every  Theo])hilus  who  has  a  disposition  and 
desire  to  know  the  immovable  certainty  (t'^v  docpdXeiav,  Luke  i,  4) 
of  the  things  of  the  Gospel.  And  John's  record  notably  supple- 
ments the  others.  It  is  pre-eminently  the  gospel  for  the  Church  of 
God.  It  is  the  gospel  of  the  heart  of  Jesus,  and  the  disciple  who 
leaned  upon  the  Lord's  bosom,  and  imbibed  so  fully  the  inspira- 
tions of  that  sacred  heart,  was  the  only  one  of  the  twelve  who  could 
write  this  inimitable  gospel  of  the  "NV^ord,  the  Light,  the  Way,  the 
Truth,  the  Resurrection,  and  the  Life. 

In  view  of  the  marvellous  harmonies  and  the  all-embracing  scope 
and  purposes  of  the  written  gospels  of  our  Lord,  how  unworthy  the 
'  Historical  Lectures  on  the  Life  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Clirist,  pp.  I'.O,  40,  Boston,  18fi:?. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  565 

scepticism  that  fastens  upon  their  little  differences  of  statement 
(which  may  be  explained  by  divers  reasonable  supposi-  unreasonabie- 
tions),  and  magnifies  these  differences  into  contradic-  "y'inJ^^the^ai- 
tions  with  design  to  disparage  the  credibility  of  the  leged  Gospel 
evangelists.  Why  puzzle  over  the  fact  that  Matthew  i^tocontradic- 
and  Mark  relate  that  the  two  thieves  who  were  cruci-  tions. 
fied  with  Jesus  reviled  him,  while  Luke  says  that  one  reviled  him, 
and  was  rebuked  by  the  other,  who  prayed  to  the  Lord,  and  re- 
ceived the  promise  of  paradise  ?  Is  it  not  supposable  that  during 
the  three  hours  of  mortal  agony  on  the  cross  all  these  things  might 
have  occurred?  Great  variety  is  noticeable  in  the  different  ac- 
counts of  the  appearances  of  Jesus  after  the  resurrection,  but  no 
man  has  ever  been  able  to  show  a  real  discrepancy  or  contradiction.' 
In  the  absence  of  particulars  we  may  not  be  able  to  detail  the  exact 
order  of  events,  but  when  it  is  shown,  on  a  number  of  hypotheses, 
that  it  was  possible  for  all  the  events  to  take  place,  the  diversity  of 
statements  becomes  an  undeniable  evidence  that  they  all  are  true. 

'  The  following  order  of  events  following  the  resurrection  is  given  by  Gardiner : 
'•  The  resurrection  itself  occurred  at  or  before  the  earliest  dawn  of  the  first  day  of 
the  week  (Matt,  xxviii,  1 ;  Mark  xvi,  2 ;  Luke  xxiv,  1 ;  John  xxi,  1).  The  women 
coming  to  the  sepulchre  find  the  stone  rolled  away  and  the  body  gone.  They  are 
amazed  and  perplexed.  Mary  Magdalene  alone  ruus  to  tell  Peter  and  John  (John 
XX,  2).  The  other  women  remain,  enter  the  tomb,  see  the  angels,  are  charged  by 
them  to  announce  the  resurrection  to  the  disciples,  and  depart  on  their  errand. 
Meantime  Peter  and  .John  run  very  rapidly  (verse  4)  to  the  sepulchre.  (A  glance  at 
the  plan  of  Jerusalem  shows  that  there  were  so  many  different  gates  by  which  per- 
sons might  pass  between  the  city  and  the  sepulchre  that  they  might  easily  have  failed 
to  meet  the  women  on  their  way).  They  enter  the  tomb  and  are  astonislied  at  the 
orderly  arrangement  of  the  grave-clothes,  and  then  return  to  the  city.  Mary  follows 
to  the  tomb,  unable  quite  to  keep  pace  with  them,  and  so  falling  behind.  She  remains 
standing  at  the  entrance  after  they  had  gone,  and,  looking  in,  sees  the  angels.  Then 
turning  about  she  sees  Jesus  himself,  and  receives  his  charge  for  the  disciples.  This 
was  our  Lord's  first  appearance  after  his  resurrection  (Mark  xvi,  9).  To  return  to 
the  women  who  were  on  their  way  from  the  sepulchre  to  the  disciples :  They  went  in 
haste,  yet  more  slowly  than  Peter  and  John.  There  were  many  of  them,  and  being 
in  a  state  of  great  agitation  and  alarm  (Mark  xvi,  8)  they  appear  to  have  become 
separated,  and  to  have  entered  the  city  by  different  gates.  One  party  of  them,  in 
their  astonishment  and  fear,  say  nothing  to  any  one  (Matt,  xxviii,  8) ;  the  others  run 
to  the  disciples  and  announce  all  that  they  had  seen,  namely,  the  vision  of  the  angels 
(Mark  xvi,  8 ;  Luke  xxiv,  9-11).  At  this  time,  before  any  report  had  come  in  of  the 
appearance  of  our  Lord  himself,  the  two  disciples  set  out  for  Emmaus  (Luke  xxiv,  13). 
Soon  after  Mary  Magdalene  comes  in  announcing  that  she  had  actually  seen  the  risen 
Lord  (Mark  xvi,  10,  11 ;  John  xx,  18).  While  these  things  are  happening  the  first- 
mentioned  party  of  the  women  are  stopped  on  the  way  by  the  appearance  of  the  Lord 
himself,  and  they  also  receive  a  charge  to  his  disciples  (Matt,  xxviii,  9,  10).  Beyond 
this  point  there  is  no  difficulty  in  the  narrative. — Harmony  of  the  Gospels  in  Greek, 
pp.  253,  254. 


566  PRINCIPLES  OP 


CHAPTER  XXXIII. 

PROGRESS    OP    DOCTRINE    AND    ANALOGY    OP    FAITH. 

The  interpreter  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  must  never  forget  that  the 
The  Holy  Scrip-  Bible  in  its  entirety,  as  now  possessed  by  the  Church, 
lures  a  growth,  ^y^s  no  sudden  gift  from  heaven,  but  the  slow  and  grad- 
ual accretion  of  many  centuries.  It  is  made  up  of  many  parts, 
which  were  produced  at  many  different  times.  For  the  first  twenty- 
five  centuries  of  human  history,  according  to  the  common  chronol- 
ogy, the  world  was  without  any  part  of  our  Bible.'  Then,  in  the 
course  of  forty  years,  the  Books  of  Moses  appeared.  Possibly  the 
Book  of  Job  belongs  to  that  early  period.  Subsequently  such  histor- 
ical collections  as  the  Books  of  Joshua  and  Judges  were  compiled, 
and  in  due  time  other  histories,  with  psalms,  proverbs,  and  the  ora- 
cles of  prophets,  were  gathered  into  many  separate  rolls  or  volumes, 
and  at  length,  after  the  Babylonian  captivity,  this  whole  body  of 
sacred  literature  was  combined  together,  and  came  to  be  recognized 
as  a  book  of  divine  authority.  The  different  writings  of  the  New 
Testament  all  appeared  within  a  period  of  about  half  a  century, 
but  they  also  furnish  the  means  of  tracing  the  development  of  life 
and  thought  in  the  early  apostolic  Church.  Our  present  canonical 
Scriptures,  therefore,  are  to  be  recognised  as  the  records  of  a  pro- 
gressive divine  revelation.  We  recognise  the  Spirit  of  God  as  the 
presiding  and  controlling  wisdom  which  shaped  these  lively  oracles. 
He  not  only  employed  holy  men  in  the  accomplishment  of  his  i)ur- 
pose  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  2;  Luke  i,  VO;  Acts  i,  16;  iii,  18;  2  Peter  i,  21), 
but  also  the  ministry  of  angels  (Acts  vii,  53;  Gal.  iii,  19;  Ileb.  ii,  2). 
A  minute  divine  providence  secured  the  embodiment  of  the  entire 
revelation  in  the  written  forms  in  which  we  now  possess  it. 
The  same  God  who  spoke  in  the  last  days  in  the  person  of  his  Son 
spoke  also  in  the  older  revelations  (Heb.  i,  l),  and  we  may  search 
his  word  in  confidence  that  divine  order  and  wisdom  will  be  found 
from  the  beginning  to  the  end. 

The  Book  of  Genesis  exhibits,  as  we  have  seen  (pp.  211,  212),  a 

'  That  is,  in  its  present  form.  No  doiibt  the  narratives  of  the  creation,  of  the  fall, 
and  the  flood,  were  handed  down  by  oral  tradition.  Tliey  may,  indeed,  long  before 
Moses'  time,  have  existed  in  written  form,  and,  with  the  gonoalojiifal  tables  and  other 
fragmentary  portions  of  patriarchal  history,  have  constituted  a  sort  of  sacred  litera- 
ture among  the  descendants  of  Shem. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  567 

«eries  of  evolutions,  which  serve  well  to  illustrate  the  progress  and 
order  of  the  divine  revelation.  First  comes  the  account  Genesis  a  series 
of  the  miraculous  beffinninff,  the  cutting,  formino:,  and  °'.  evolutions 

°  ^'  ="  o'  and  of  revela- 

making  (Nnzi  and  n|>j?)  of  Adam's  world  (Gen.  i,  1-ii,  3).   tions. 
This  we  have  already  explained  (pp.  549-552)  as  the  supernatural 
preparation  of  the  heavens  and  land  where  the  first  man  appeared. 
From  that  geographical  and  historical  beginning  we  trace  a  well- 
defined  sei-ies  of  generations  (mpin).     The  first  series  comprises  the 
"generations  of  the  heavens  and  the  land"  (ii,  4).     The  starting- 
point  is  "  a  day  of  Jehovah  God's  making  land  and  heavens,"  when 
as  yet  no  plant  or  herb  of  the  new  creation  had  commenced  the 
processes  of  growth;  no  rain  had  yet  fallen,  no  man  to  work  the 
soil  had  yet  appeared  (ver.  5).     It  is  the  morning  of  the  sixth  day 
of  the  creative  week.     The  whole  surface  of  the  ground  is  watered, 
and  the  processes  of  growth  begin  (ver.  6).     Man  is  formed  {~)T) 
from  the  dust  of  the  soil,  and  becomes  ('•n^l)  a  living  soul  by  the 
breath  of  Jehovah  God  (ver.  7).     His  formation  is,  therefore,  con- 
ceived as  a  generation  or  birth  out  of  the  heavens  and  the  land  by 
the  breath  (nOK>J)  of  God.     Then  the  woman  was  produced  from 
the  man,  another  step  in  the  process  of  tliese  generations  (ver.  23; 
■comp.  1  Cor.  xi,  8).     Then  follows  the  narrative  of  the  fall,  show- 
ing how  the  first  man  was  from  the  earth  and  earthy  (1  Cor.  xv, 
47),  and  by  disobedience  lost  his  original  relation  to  God.     The  first 
generations  run  to  violence  and  crime,  and  become  more  and  more 
earthly  until  Seth  is  born,  and  with  him  the  revelation  takes  a  new 
departure.     "The  book  of  the  generations  of  Adam"  (v,  1)  is  not 
3,  record  of  Adam's  origin,  but  of  his  posterity  in  the  line  of  Seth. 
But  again  the  race  deteriorates,  and  the  sons  of  Seth,  so  much  nobler 
than  the  Cainites,  and  other  children  of  Adam,  that  they  are  called 
the   sons  of  God   (vi,   2),   intermarry  with   the    fair  but   ignoble 
daughters  of  men,  and  the  land  is  filled  with  violence.     With  Noah, 
w^ho  was  just  and  upright,  and  walked  with  God  (vi,  9),  another 
series  of  generations  takes  its  departure,  and  the  flood  destroys  all 
the  rest  of  men. 

After  the  flood  God  establishes  a  covenant  with  Noah  (ix,  9),  and 
through  him  foretells  the  honour  that  shall  come  to  the  From  Noah  on- 
■dwellings  of  Shem  (ix,  27).  But  the  tendencies  of  the  ^^'^rd. 
sons  of  Noah  still  appear  to  be  earthy,  and  their  generations  are 
rapidly  sketched  (x).  Shem's  line  is  traced  to  Terah  (xi,  10-26), 
with  whose  son,  Abram,  the  cvenant  of  grace  and  the  promise  of 
unspeakable  glory  in  the  aftei  times  are  set  forth  in  fiiller  light. 
The  history  of  Abraham,  the  friend  of  God,  first  exhibits  in  clear 
outline  the  wonderful  condescension  of  Jehovah;  he  is  separated 


568  PRINCIPLES   OP 

from  country  and  kindred,  and  disciplined  in  faith.  He  receives: 
the  covenant  of  circumcision,  and  the  promise  of  a  seed  through 
whom  all  nations  shall  be  blessed.  Jehovah  speaks  to  him  in 
visions  and  dreams,  and  in  the  person  of  his  angel.  Additional 
revelations  come  in  connexion  with  Isaac  and  Ishmael,  the  genera- 
tions of  Jacob  branch  out  into  twelve  tribes,  and  the  prophetic 
blessing  of  the  dying  patriarch  reveals  the  outline  of  their  history 
in  after  times  (Gen.  xlix). 

It  is  impossible  to  trace  the  record  of  these  ten  generations  of 

the  Book  of  Genesis  without  observing  the  steady  prog- 
A  progress  of  .  *       •  i  •       i      i  • 

Revelation  in    ress  of  divine  revelation.     Again  and  again  the  history. 

Genesis.  darkened  by  the  growth  of  human  wickedness,  fastens 

upon  a  divinely  chosen  name,  and  from  it  takes  a  new  departure. 
With  each  new  series  of  generations  some  new  promise  is  given,  or 
some  great  purpose  of  God  is  brought  to  light.  While  the  ten- 
dency of  the  race  is  to  grow  worse  and  worse,  there  appears  at  the 
same  time  the  unwavering  purpose  of  the  Almighty  to  choose  out 
and  maintain  a  holy  seed.  Thus  the  Book  of  Genesis  is  an  essential 
part  of  the  history  of  redemption. 

The  centuries  of  Egyptian  bondage  are  rapidly  passed  over,  but 
The  Mosaic  leg-  the  history  of  the  deliverance  from  Egypt  is  detailed 
lra"o"  reveir-  ^^'^^^^  notable  fulness.  Jehovah's  triumph  over  the  gods 
tion.  of  Egypt,  the  establishing  of  the  passover,  the  journey 

to  Sinai,  the  giving  of  the  law,  the  building  of  the  tabernacle,  and 
the  entire  Mosaic  ministry  and  legislation  were  the  beginnings  of  a 
new  era.  Captious  critics,  incompetent  to  grasp  the  scope  and 
moral  grandeur  of  the  Mosaic  system,  may  cavil  at  some  of  its  en- 
actments, and  forget  that  Moses  had  to  do  with  a  nation  of  emanci- 
pated serfs ;  but  the  philosophical  historian  will  ever  recognise  the 
Sinaitic  legislation  as  one  of  the  greatest  wonders  of  the  world. 
The  Decalogue,  sublimely  uttered  from  the  mount  of  God,  embodies 
the  substance  of  all  true  religion  and  all  sound  morality.  The 
construction  of  the  tabernacle,  modelled  after  a  divine  plan  (Exod. 
XXV,  40),  and  the  order  of  the  Levitical  service,  most  truly  sym- 
bolize the  profoundest  conceptions  of  the  curse  of  sin  and  the  power 
of  God  in  redemption. 

But,  aside  from  the  Decalogue  and  the  symbolism  of  the  Mosaic 

cultus,  how  full  and  comprehensive  the  doctrinal  and 
Doctrine  of  God.  '  ,.  ^,,n  ii         r     ^       -r, 

moral  teachings  of  the  last  four  books  ot  the  Penta- 
teuch. The  personality,  attributes,  nd  moral  perfections  of  God 
are  set  forth  in  unspeakably  superior  form  to  that  of  any  and  all 
other  religious  systems  of  the  ancient  or  modern  world.  The  self- 
existence  and  eternity  of  God,  his  holiness,  justice,  and  mercy,  his 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  560 

wisdom  and  his  providence,  are  revealed  in  many  ways.  How  aw- 
fully sublime  and  yet  how  gracious  that  revelation  to  Moses  in  the 
mount,  when  "  Jehovah  descended  in  the  cloud,  and  stood  with  him 
there,  and  called  in  the  name  of  Jehovah ;  and  Jehovah  passed  by 
before  him,  and  called :  Jehovah,  Jehovah,  God,  merciful  and  gra- 
cious, long-suffering  and  abundant  in  kindness  and  truth,  keeping 
kindness  for  thousands,  lifting  iniquity,  and  transgression  and  sin, 
but  in  punishing  will  not  let  go  unpunished,  visiting  the  iniquity 
of  fathers  upon  children,  and  upon  children  of  children,  upon  the 
third  and  upon  the  fourth"  (genei*ations).    Exod.  xxxiv,  5-7. 

Such  a  revelation  would  necessarily  beget  the  holiest  reverence, 
and  at  the  same  time  evince  that  he  was  worthy  of  all  „ 

-^  Superior  etlii- 

love.  Hence  the  commandment,  "  Thou  shalt  love  cai  and  cmi 
Jehovah,  thy  God,  with  all  thy  heart  and  with  all  thy  ^°*^®' 
soul  and  with  all  thy  might"  (Deut.  vi,  5).  This  doctrine  of  God 
furnished  the  basis  of  a  superior  ethical  code.  The  true  Israelite 
was  required  to  guard  the  morals  of  his  neighbour,  and  love  him  as 
himself.  He  must  not  yield  to  feelings  of  vengeance,  nor  hold  bit- 
terness in  his  heart  toward  any  of  his  brethren  (Lev,  xix,  17,  18). 
He  must  not  oppress  the  poor  and  the  needy,  but  leave  large  glean- 
ings for  them  in  his  harvest  field  (Lev.  xix,  10).  He  must  not  even 
allow  his  neighbour's  ox  or  sheep  to  go  astray,  but  seek  to  restore 
them  to  him  as  if  they  were  his  own  (Deut.  xxii,  1-3).  Even  in 
taking  the  young  of  birds  for  any  proper  purpose,  he  must,  in 
kindness  and  consideration,  spare  the  mother  bird.  Surely  a  code 
which  enacted  such  humane  provisions  ought  never  to  have  been 
charged  with  barbarous  severity.'  Its  severest  penalties  were 
grounded  in  the  highest  expediency,^  and  ample  securities  were 
provided  against  injustice  and  capricious  acts  of  power.  While 
the  governments  of  all  the  great  nations  of  that  age  were  despotic 
and  largely  barbarous,  that  of  the  Mosaic  legislation  was  essentially 
republican." 

The  Pentateuch  holds  the  same  relation  to  the  subsequent  books 

^  See  Sewall,  Humaneness  of  the  Mosaic  Code,  Bib.  Sacra  for  1862,  pp.  368-384. 

*  Barrows  observes:  "The  attitude  of  the  Mosaic  economy  toward  the  Gentile  na- 
tions was  indeed  severe,  but  it  was  the  severity  of  love  and  goodwill.  It  had  for  its 
object  not  their  destruction,  but  a  speedier  preparation  of  the  way  for  the  advent  of 
Christ,  in  whom  the  promise,  '  In  thy  seed  shall  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  be  blessed,' 
was  to  find  its  fulfilment." — Missionary  Spirit  of  the  Psalms  and  Prophets.  Bib.  Sacra 
for  1860,  p.  450. 

*  See  the  excellences  of  the  Mosaic  legislation  elaborately  set  forth  by  Michaelis, 
Commentaries  on  the  Laws  of  Moses  (Eng.  Trans,  by  Smith,  4  vols.,  Lond.,  1814); 
Warburton,  The  Divine  Legation  of  Moses ;  Graves,  on  the  Four  Last  Books  of  the 
Pentateuch  (Lond.,  18.50). 


570  PRINCIPLES   OP 

of  the  OKI  Testament  that  the  gospels  hold  to  the  rest  of  the  New 
The  Pentateuch  Testament.  It  contains  in  some  f  oi'm  the  substance  of 
oid'^T^st" ment  ^^^  ^^®  ^^^  Testament  revelation,  but  it  intimates  in 
revelations.  many  a  passage  that  other  revelations  will  be  given. 
It  assumes  that  a  great  and  glorious  future  is  awaiting  the  chosen 
nation,  and  indicates  the  ways  by  which  the  glories  may  be  realized. 
At  the  same  time  it  warns  against  the  possibility  of  lamentable 
failure.  The  entire  system  of  Mosaic  laws,  moral,  civil,  and  cere- 
monial, was  wisely  adapted  to  train  the  Israelitish  nation,  and 
served  as  a  schoolmaster  to  prepare  them  and  the  world  for  the  re- 
-ception  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  So  far  was  Moses  from  regarding 
his  work  as  final  in  the  training  of  Israel,  that  he  announced  by 
the  word  of  Jehovah  that  another  prophet  should  arise,  to  whom 
divine  revelations  would  be  given,  and  whom  the  people  should 
obey  (Deut.  xviii,  15-19).  The  last  words  of  the  great  lawgiver 
are  full  of  warning,  of  promise,  and  of  prophecy  (Deut.  xxix-xxxiii). 

After  the  death  of  Moses  Joshua  received  his  divine  commission 
1  at  ion  ^^  carry  forward  the  great  work  of  establishing  Israel 
continued  after  in  the  land  of  promise.  Jehovah  spoke  to  him  as  he 
did  to  Moses  (Josh,  i,  1;  iii,  7;  iv,  1).  He  also  revealed 
himself  in  the  person  of  his  angel  (Josh,  v,  13),  and  in  all  the  his- 
tory of  the  conquest  and  settlement  of  Canaan,  Jehovah  spoke  as 
frequently  and  familiarly  with  Joshua  as  he  had  done  with  Moses. 
In  the  dark  times  of  the  Judges  God  left  himself  not  without  pro- 
phetic witness.  Revelations  came  to  Deborah  and  Gideon  and 
Manoah.  At  length  Samuel  arose  when  prophecy  was  rare  in 
Israel  (1  Sam.  iii,  1),  and  in  his  day  the  schools  of  the  prophets  ap- 
pear (1  Sam,  X,  5;  xix,  20).  When  David  became  king  of  all  Israel, 
the  promise  and  prophecy  of  the  Messiah  assumed  a  fuller  form. 

The  word  which  came  to  the  king  through  Nathan  the  prophet 
(2  Sam.  vii,  4-17)  was  the  germ  of  the  Messianic  psalms,  and  the 
Theoiogyof  the  entire  collection  of  lyrics,  which  constitutes  the  Hebrew 
Psalter.  psalter,  is  an  invaluable  index  of  the  highest  religious 

thought  and  feeling  of  Israel  in  the  times  of  David  and  later.  The 
Messianic  hope  is  enhanced  by  a  variety  of  conceptions:  he  is  the 
anointed  King  in  Zion,  declared  to  be  the  very  Son  of  Jehovah 
(Psa.  ii) ;  he  is  a  reigning  Lord,  AV'ho  is  at  the  same  time  a  priest  for- 
ever after  the  order  of  Melchizedek  (Psa,  ex);  his  majesty  and  grace 
are  extolled  above  all  the  sons  of  men  (Psa.  xlv) ;  but  he  is  also  a 
sufferer,  crying  out  as  if  forsaken  of  God,  while  his  enemies  deride 
him  and  cast  lots  for  his  vesture  (Psa.  xxii) ;  he  even  sinks  into  the 
grave,  but  exults  in  hope  and  confidence  tliat  he  shall  not  see  corrup- 
tion (Psa.  xvi).     The  doctrine  of  God  is  also  set  forth  in  the  psalter 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  571 

in  new  force  and  beauty.  He  is  Lord  of  earth  and  sea  and  heavens, 
ruling  on  high  and  beholding  all;  the  almighty  Preserver,  the 
omnipresent  Spirit,  infinitely  perfect  in  every  moral  excellence ; 
tender,  compassionate,  long-suffering,  marvellous  in  mercy,  and  yet 
terrible  in  his  judgments,  fearful  in  holiness,  ever  vindicating  the 
truth ;  he  is  the  absolute  and  eternal  God,  the  fountain  of  life  and 
of  light.  The  guardianshijD  of  angels  (Psa.  xxxiv,  7;  xci,  11)  and 
the  hope  of  a  blissful  immortality  (xvii,  15)  were  not  wanting  in 
the  psalmist's  faith.  The  doctrines  of  redeeming  grace,  of  pardon 
from  sin,  of  cleansing  from  guilt ;  the  hidden  life  of  trust ;  the  per- 
sonal approach  of  the  worshipper  into  closest  f ellowshii:)  with  God ; 
the  joy  and  gladness  of  that  fellowship,  and  the  probationary  dis- 
cipline of  the  saints,  are  doctrines  which  find  manifold  expression 
in  the  hymn  book  of  the  Israelitish  people.' 

The  age  of  Solomon  was  the  golden  age  of  the  proverbial  philos- 
ophy of  the  Hebrews.     The  Book  of  Proverbs  repre-   ^^    „  , 

i     •'  .  .  The  Solomonic 

sents  the  Old  Testament  doctrines  of  practical  wisdom  Proverbial  pm- 
(nopn),  and  is  the  great  textbook  of  biblical  ethics.  It  "^^P^^^- 
brings  out  in  fuller  form  and  in  a  great  variety  of  precepts  the 
ethical  principles  embodied  in  the  Mosaic  law.  It  has  to  do  with 
practical  life,  and  so  serves,  at  the  right  stage  in  the  progress  of  the 
divine  revelation,  to  exalt  that  human  element  in  which  pure  re- 
ligion necessarily  finds  some  of  its  most  beautiful  manifestations. 
^'  The  Book  of  Proverbs,"  says  Stanley,  "  is  not  on  a  level  with  the 
Prophets  or  the  Psalms.  It  approaches  human  things  and  things 
divine  from  quite  another  side.  It  has  even  something  of  a  worldly, 
prudential  look,  unlike  the  rest  of  the  Bible.  But  this  is  the  very 
reason  whv  its  recognition  as  a  sacred  book  is  so  useful.  It  is  the 
philosophy  of  practical  life.  It  is  the  sign  to  us  that  the  Bible  does 
not  despise  common  sense  and  discretion.  It  impresses  upon  us,  in 
the  most  forcible  manner,  the  value  of  intelligencie  and  prudence, 
and  of  a  good  education.  The  whole  strength  of  the  Hebrew  lan- 
guage, and  of  the  sacred  authority  of  the  book,  is  thrown  upon 
these  homely  truths.     It  deals,  too,  in  that  refined,  discriminating, 

'  "  This  book,"  says  Calvin,  "  not  unreasonably,  am  I  wont  to  style  an  anatomy  of 
all  parts  of  the  soul,  for  no  one  will  discover  in  himself  a  single  feeling  whereof  the 
image  is  not  reflected  in  this  mirror.  All  griefs,  sorrows,  fears,  doubts,  hopes,  cares, 
and  anxieties — in  short,  all  the  tumultuous  agitations  wherewith  the  minds  of  men 
are  wont  to  be  tossed — the  Holy  Ghost  hath  here  represented  to  the  life.  The  rest  of 
Scripture  contains  the  commands  which  God  gave  to  his  servants  to  be  delivered  unto 
us.  But  here  the  prophets  themselves,  holding  converse  with  God,  inasmuch  as  they 
lay  bare  all  their  inmost  feelings,  invite  or  impel  every  one  of  us  to  self-examination, 
that  of  all  the  infirmities  to  which  we  are  liable,  and  all  the  sins  of  which  we  are  so 
full,  none  may  remain  hidden." — Commentary  on  the  Psalms,  Preface. 


572  PRINCIPLES  OF 

careful  view  of  the  finer  shades  of  human  character,  so  often 
overlooked  by  theologians,  but  so  necessary  to  any  true  estimate  of 
human  life." ' 

In  the  great  propliets  of  the  Old  Testament  the  depth  and  spir- 
al i  T,f   ,...„    itualitv  of  the  Mosaic  religjion  attained  their  highest 

uici    1  osi.   rev-  »  ^j?  c? 

elation  reached  expression.  We  have  already  outlined  the  progressive 
ituaiuy*^in^'tiie  character  of  the  Messianic  prophecies,  and  seen  the  or- 
great  prophets,  ganic  and  vital  relations  of  prophecy  to  the  history  of 
the  Isi-aelitish  people  (p.  408).  The  Messianic  hope,  first  uttered  in 
the  garden  of  Eden  (Gen.  iii,  15),  was  a  fountain-head  from  which 
a  gradually  increasing  stream  went  forth,  i-eceiving  constant  acces- 
sions as  prophet  after  prophet  arose  commissioned  to  utter  some 
clearer  oracle.  In  a  general  way,  at  least,  each  new  prophet  added 
to  the  work  of  his  predecessors.^  The  prophecy  of  Jonah,  one 
of  the  earliest  written,  emphasizes  Jehovah's  compassion  upon  a 
great  heathen  city  which  repents  at  his  word.  It  is  conspicuously 
an  oracle  of  hope  to  the  Gentiles.  Joel,  the  ancient  apocalyptist, 
sees  in  the  desolating  judgments  on  the  land  signs  of  the  com- 
ing of  Jehovah,  and  calls  upon  the  people  to  rend  their  hearts 
rather  than  their  garments  in  evidence  of  contrite  humiliation  be- 
fore God  (Joel  ii,  12).  His  visions  stretch  away  to  the  latter  times 
when  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  shall  be  poured  out  upon  all  flesh,  and 
whosoever  shall  call  upon  the  name  of  Jehovah  shall  be  saved 
(ii,  28,  32).  Hosea  bewails  the  idolatry  of  Israel  and  Judah,  but 
sees  great  hope  for  them  if  they  will  but  offer  their  lips  as  sacrifi- 
cial offerings  of  prayer  and  praise  (Hos.  xiv,  2).  The  formal  cere- 
monial worship  of  the  nation  was  fast  losing  all  its  deep  sacredness, 
and  ceasing  to  be  a  means  of  holy,  heartfelt  devotion.  With  such 
outward  unspiritual  worship  Jehovah  could  not  be  pleased,  and  he 
says  in  Amos  (v,  21,  22) : 

'  History  of  the  Jewish  Church,  second  series,  p.  260.   New  York,  1869. 

2  R.  Payne  Smith  observes :  "  Men  never  do  understand  anything  unless  already  in  their 
minds  they  have  some  kindred  ideas,  somethinj;;  that  leads  up  to  the  new  thought  which 
they  are  required  to  master.  Our  knowledge  grows,  but  it  is  by  the  gradual  accumu- 
lation of  thought  upon  thought,  and  by  following  out  ideas  already  gained  to  their 
legitimate  conclusions.  God  followed  this  rule  even  in  the  supernatural  knowledge 
bestowed  upon  tlio  propliets.  It  was  a  growing  light,  a  gradual  dawning  preparatory 
to  the  sunrise,  and  no  flush  of  liglitning,  illuminating  everything  for  one  moment  with 
ghastly  splendour,  to  be  succeeded  immediately  by  a  deeper  and  more  oppressive, 
gloom.  .  .  .  Carefully,  and  with  prayer,  the  prophets  studied  the  teaching  of  tlicir 
predecessors,  and  by  the  use  of  the  light  ab-eady  given  were  made  fit  for  more  light, 
and  to  be  the  spokesmen  of  Jehovah  in  teaching  ever  more  clearly  to  the  Church  tliose 
truths  which  have  regenerated  mankind." — Bampton  Lectures.  Prophecy  a  Prepara- 
tion for  Oir.ist,  pp.  :}04,  30.5.     Boston,  1870. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  573 

I  have  hated,  I  have  despised  your  feasts, 

And  I  will  not  breathe  in  your  assemblies; 

For  if  ye  ofler  me  burnt-offerings  and  your  meat-offerings 

I  will  not  be  delighted. 

And  a  peace-oflFering  of  your  fatlings  I  will  not  regard. 

Put  away  from  me  the  noise  of  thy  songs ; 

And  the  music  of  thy  harps  I  will  not  hear. 

And  let  judgment  be  rolled  along  as  the  waters, 

And  righteousness  as  a  perennial  stream. 

It  would  thus  appear  that  as  idolatry  increased,  and  the  ceremo- 
nial worsliiiD  became  cold,  heartless,  and  idolatrous,  the  prophets, 
as  inspired  watchmen  and  teachers,  turned  the  thoughts  of  the  peo- 
ple to  those  deeper  spiritual  truths  of  which  the  ceremonial  cultus 
furnished  only  the  outer  symbols.  They  yearned  for  a  purer  wor- 
ship, and  a  more  real  and  vital  approach  to  God.  They  began  to 
realize,  what  the  New  Testament  so  fully  reveals,  that  the  law  was 
only  a  shadow,  not  the  very  likeness,  of  the  good  things  to  come, 
and  that  the  ritual  sacrifices  could  never  perfect  the  worshippers 
who  depended  on  them  alone  (Heb.  x,  l).     Thus  Micah  (vi,  6-8): 

With  what  shall  I  come  before  Jehovah — 

Bend  myself  to  the  God  of  height  ? 

Shall  I  come  before  him  with  burnt-ofiferings  ? 

With  calves,  sons  of  a  year  ? 

Will  Jehovah  be  pleased  with  thousands  of  rams, 

With  myriads  of  streams  of  oil? 

Shall  I  give  my  firstborn  for  my  transgression, 

Fruit  of  my  body  for  the  sin  of  my  soul  ? 

He  has  showed  thee,  O  man,  what  is  good ; 

And  what  is  Jehovah  seeking  from  thee, 

But  to  execute  judgment  and  the  love  of  mercy, 

And  humbly  to  walk  with  thy  God? 

In  the  Book  of  Isaiah  the  prophetic  word  reaches  a  lofty  climax. 
This  evangelist  among  the  prophets  seems  to  rise  at  written  propn- 
will  above  the  limitations  of  time,  and  to  see  the  past,  ^.^^.^^  j^  is_ 
the  present,  and  the  future  converge  in  great  historic  raei. 
epochs  vital  to  the  interests  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Although  the 
first  thirty-nine  chapters  deal  mainly  with  the  matters  of  contem- 
porary interest  and  note,  they  are  filled  with  glowing  visions  of 
Messianic  triumph.  The  first  part  of  the  second  chapter,  appa- 
rently borrowed  from  Micah,  portrays  the  universality  and  glory  of 
that  spiritual  dominion  which  is  to  supplant  Judaism,  and  go  forth 
from  Jerusalem  to  establish  peace  among  all  nations.  The  Messi- 
anic promise  again  and  again  finds  varied  expression  (chap,  vii,  14; 


574  PRINCIPLES   OF 

ix,  1-7;  xi,  1-10).  Where,  in  all  the  pictures  of  a  coming  golden 
age,  can  be  found  a  more  beautiful  outline  than  Isa.  xxxv  ?  But 
in  the  last  twenty-seven  chapters  Isaiah's  prophecies  exhibit  their 
highest  spirituality.  He  depicts  things  in  their  divine  relations, 
and  contemplates  the  redemption  of  Israel  as  from  the  position  of 
the  high  and  exalted  One  who  dwells  in  etei-nity  (Ivii,  15).  His 
thoughts  and  ways  are  loftier  than  those  of  men,  even  as  the  heav- 
ens are  higher  than  the  earth  (Iv,  8,  9).  Looking  away  from  the 
darkening  present,  and  exulting  in  glowing  visions  of  Messiah's 
triumph,  the  prophet  often  speaks  in  the  name  and  person  of  Mes- 
siah and  his  elect,  and  apprehends  the  glories  of  his  reign  as  the 
creation  of  a  new  heavens  and  a  new  earth. 

The  prophecies  of  Daniel  exhibit  the  increasing  light  of  divine 
The  prophecies  revelation  which  came  when  Israel,  by  exile,  was  brought 
of  Daniel.  in  contact  with  the  great  heathen  world-powers.  Dan- 
iel speaks  as  one  who  looks  out  from  the  midst  of  the  operations  of 
great  empires,  and  sees  a  throne  higher  than  that  of  the  kings 
of  Babylon  or  of  Persia,  and  forces  more  numerous  and  mighty 
than  all  the  armies  of  the  world  (Dan.  vii,  9,  10).  "  In  him,"  says 
R.  Payne  Smith,  "prophecy  has  a  new  development;  it  breaks  away 
from  the  bonds  of  Jewish  thought,  and  sets  before  us  the  grand 
onward  march  of  the  world's  history,  and  the  Christian  Church  as 
the  centre  and  end  of  all  history." '  His  visions  make  prominent  a 
determined  end  or  consummation,  when  a  desolating  abomination 
shall  destroy  the  sanctuary  (ix,  26,  27;  comp.  Matt,  xxiv,  15;  Mark 
xiii,  14;  Luke  xxi,  20): 

And  many,  sleeping  in  tlie  dust  of  the  ground,  shall  awake, 

These  to  life  eternal, 

And  those  to  shame  and  eternal  contempt. 

And  the  wise  ones  shall  shine  as  the  brightness  of  the  firmament, 

And  those  who  make  many  righteous 

As  the  stars  for  ever  and  ever  (Dan.  xii,  2,  3). 

In  some  respects  Ezekiel  surpasses  Daniel  in  the  depth  and  ful- 
Prophecies  of  "6SS  of  his  revelations.  His  vision  of  the  cherubim  and 
Ezekiel.  ^he  theophany  is  set  forth  in  the  first  chapter  of  his 

prophecy  with  a  wealth  of  suggestive  symbols  not  to  be  found  else- 
Avhere  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  the  detailed  description  of  the 
new  temple  and  land  of  Israel  (chapters  xl-xlviii)  is  an  anticipation 
of  John's  vision  of  the  new  heavens  and  the  new  earth  (Rev.  xxi). 
Ezekiel's  city  of  Jehovah-Shammah  (xlviii,  35)  is  no  other  than  the 
New  Jerusalem  of  John.     The  doctrine  of  the  resurrection,  which 

'  Prophecy  a  Preparation  for  Christ,  p.  238. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  575 

in  Isaiah  (xxvi,  19)  is  suggested  by  a  striking  apostrophe,  is  ex- 
pressed in  formal  statement  by  Daniel  (xii,  2),  and  assumed  as  a 
common  belief  in  the  imagery  of  Ezekiel  (xxxvii,  1-14). 

After  the  Babylonian  exile  we  note  that  Haggai  sees  in  the  sec- 
ond temple  a  glory  greater  than  that  of  the  former  post-exiie 
(Hag.  ii,  9).  Zechariah  combines  in  his  prophetic  book  prophets. 
the  varied  symbolism  of  Daniel  and  Ezekiel  with  the  lofty  spirit- 
uality of  Isaiah.  And  the  "  burden  of  Jehovah's  word  to  Israel  by 
the  hand  of  Malachi"  (Mai.  i,  1),  the  last  of  the  Old  Testament 
prophets,  is  a  series  of  rebukes  to  a  false  and  heartless  formalism, 
and  an  earnest  call  to  rei^entance  and  personal  self-consecration.^ 

Passing  over  the  four  hundred  years  of  silence  between  Malachi 
and  -the  advent  of  Jesus  Christ,  we  find  the  two  Testa-  prophetic  link 
ments  linked  by  a  noticeable  prophetic  bond.  The  Old  o^J^an°d  New 
Testament  closes  with  a  promise  that  Elijah  the  prophet  Testaments. 
shall  come  before  the  great  day  of  Jehovah,  and  the  gospel  history 
of  the  New  Testament  opens  with  the  ministry  of  this  Elijah  who 
was  to  come  (Luke  i,  17;  Matt,  xi,  14;  xvii,  10-13).  But  John  the 
Baptist,  though  filled  with  the  spirit  and  power  of  Elijah,  was 
merely  a  foi'erunner,  a  herald,  a  voice  (John  i,  23),  provided  in  the 
divine  order  to  prepare  the  way  of  the  Lord.  His  ministry  was 
professedly  introductory  to  the  Gospel  Age,  and  his  constant  testi- 
mony was  that  one  mightier  than  himself  was  about  to  come,  who 
would  baptize  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  fire  (Matt,  iii,  11). 

The  ministry  and  words  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  as  recorded  in  the 
gospels,  constitute  the  substance  of  all  Christian  doc-  p.  .  .,  . 
trines.  As  the  five  books  of  Moses  really  embody  the  ings  the  sub- 
germs  of  all  subsequent  revelation,  so  in  a  clearer  form  the^flnai*  form*^ 
the  teachings  of  Jesus  embrace  every  great  truth  of  the  of  christian 
Christian  faith.  But  our  Lord  himself  was  explicit  in 
declaring  that  his  own  teaching  must  needs  be  supplemented  by  the 
fuller  revelations  of  the  Spirit.  He  taught  by  parable,  by  precept, 
and  by  example,  but  he  found  the  hearts  of  the  people  and  of  his 
own  disciples  too  heavy  to  apprehend  the  grand  scope  and  spirit- 
uality of  his  Gospel,  and  declared  that  it  was  expedient  for  him  to 

1  R.  Payne  Smith  observes  that  prophecy  "  was  not  withdrawn  abruptly.  It  still  lin- 
gered in  those  beautiful  psalms  of  degrees  sung  by  the  exiles,  and  in  those  prophets 
who  helped  in  rearing  the  second  house.  But  at  the  dispersion  it  had  done  its  work. 
The  Jews  wondered  that  no  prophet  more  arose.  We  can  see  why  the  gift  was  with- 
drawn. The  time  for  teaching  had  ceased.  The  Jews  were  children  no  longer,  but 
grown  men ;  and,  like  grown  men,  they  must  leave  home,  and  go  out  into  all  lands  to 
carry  to  them  the  truths  which  the  prophets  had  taught  them." — Prophecy  a  Prepa- 
ration for  Christ,  p.  335. 


S76  PRINCIPLES   OP 

go  away  in  order  that  the  Spirit  of  truth  might  come  to  guide  into 
all  the  truth,  and  to  teach  all  things  (John  xiv,  25,  26;  xvi,  7-15).' 
The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  shows  that  divine  revelations  were 
Keveiations  continued  after  the  ascension  of  the  Lord.  On  the  day 
continued  after     £  Pentccost  the  waitinsf  disciples  received  the  gift  of 

the  ascension  of  _    _  .  , 

Jesus.  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  began  to  realize  as  never  before 

the  "powers  of  the  coming  age"  (Heb.  vi,  5).  Thenceforth  they 
went  forth  with  a  heavenly  authority  to  proclaim  the  newly  enun- 
<;iated  truth  of  God.  The  angel  of  the  Lord  opened  the  prison 
doors  where  the  apostles  were  shut  up,  and  commanded  them  to 
<3ontinue  speaking  the  words  of  eternal  life  (Acts  v,  19,  20;  comp. 
xii,  7  ;  xvi,  26).  The  martyr  Stephen  saw  the  heavens  opened,  and 
the  Son  of  man  standing  on  the  right  hand  of  God  (vii,  56).  The 
fiame  Lord  Jesus  appeared  to  Saul  on  his  way  to  Damascus  (ix,  17), 
and  also  to  Ananias,  in  a  vision  (ix,  10).  Peter  was  guided  into 
opening  the  kingdom  of  God  to  the  Gentiles  by  a  symbolic  vision 
(x,  9-16),  and  was  aided  by  the  ministry  of  an  angel  of  God  (x,  3-7). 
Special  revelations  of  the  Spirit  directed  Philip  and  Paul  in  their 
journeys  (viii,  29,  39;  xvi,  7).  The  great  apostle  of  the  Gentiles 
was  repeatedly  directed  by  visions  and  revelations  of  God  (Acts 
xvi,  9;  xxii,  17-21;  comp.  2  Cor.  xii,  1-4).  Thus  it  is  evident  from 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  that  what  Jesus  began  to  do  and  teach 
(Acts  i,  1)  Avas  carried  into  completion  by  those  whom  he  chose  to 
be  the  authoritative  expounders  of  his  word. 

The  Book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  a  connecting  link  between 
the  gospels  and  the  epistles.  It  is  essentially  a  historical  introduc- 
tion to  the  latter,  and  without  the  information  it  affords,  both  the 
The  Epistles  em-  gospels  and  the  cpistlcs  would  be  involved  in  much 
rateVteachtnS  obscurity.  The  epistles  preserve  for  the  Church  the 
of  the  apostles,  teachings  of  the  apostles,  and  present  them  in  a  form 
admirably  adapted  to  meet  the  wants  of  all  classes  of  readers.' 

'  This  subject  is  ably  presented  in  Bernard's  Bampton  Lectures  on  the  Progress  of 
Doctiine  in  the  New  Testament.  In  Lecture  iii  lie  lays  down  and  elaborates  the  fol- 
lowing propositions :  "  First,  The  teaching  of  the  Lord  in  the  gospels  includes  the 
substance  of  all  Christian  doctrine,  but  does  not  bear  the  character  of  finality.  Sec- 
ondly, The  teaching  of  the  Lord  in  the  gospels  is  a  visibly  progressive  course,  but  on 
reaching  its  highest  point  announces  its  own  incompleteness,  and  opens  another  stage 
of  instruction." — P.  7l>. 

''■  "The  j)rophets,"  writes  Bernard,  "delivered  oracles  to  the  people,  but  the  apostles 
wrote  Ir/lcrs  to  the  hrcthrcn,  letters  characterized  by  all  that  fulness  of  unreserved  ex- 
j)Ianation,  and  that  play  of  various  feeling,  which  arc  projicr  to  that  form  of  inter- 
course. It  is  in  its  nature  a  more  familiar  communication,  as  between  those  who  are, 
or  should  be,  equals.  That  character  may  less  obviously  force  vipon  us  the  sense,  that 
the  liglit  which  is  thrown  upon  all  subjects  is  that  of  a  divine  inspiration;  but  this  u> 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  577 

Oreat  principles,  enunciated  by  Jesus,  are  elaborated  and  applied  to 
practical  life  and  experience  by  the  apostolic  epistles.  The  Epistles 
of  Paul,  including  that  to  the  Hebi-ews,  traverse  a  wide  field  of 
Christian  doctrine  and  experience.  Their  range  may  be  indicated 
by  the  following  classification:  (1)  Dogmatical,  discussing  especial- 
ly the  doctrines  of  sin  and  redemption  (Romans  and  Galatians) ; 

(2)  Christological  (Ephesians,  Philippians,   Colossians,    Hebrews); 

(3)  Ecclesiastical,  devoted  to  the  order,  practice,  and  life  of  the 
Church  (Corinthians) ;  (4)  Pastoral  (Timothy,  Titus,  Philemon)  ; 
and  (5)  Eschatological  (Thessalonians).  Of  course,  none  of  these 
epistles  is  devoted  exclusively  to  one  particular  subject,  but  each 
contains  more  or  less  of  doctrine,  reproof,  exhortation,  and  counsels 
for  practical  life.  The  catholic  epistles  are  concerned  more  exclu- 
sively Avith  the  practical  affairs  of  the  Christian  life.  Bernard  em- 
phasizes the  fact  that  they  were  written  by  Peter  and  John,  the 
two  chief  apostles,  and  James  and  Jude,  the  brethren  of  the  Lord. 
"  We  take  knowledge  of  them  that  they  have  been  with  Jesus,  and 
own  the  highest  authority  which  association  with  him  can  give." 
But  he  observes  that  the  united  epistles  of  these  representatives  of 
our  Lord  form  only  a  kind  of  supplement  to  the  writings  of  Paul. 
"  Had  we  been  permitted,"  he  adds,  "  to  choose  our  instructors  from 
among  '  the  glorious  company,'  three  of  these  names  at  least  would 
have  been  uttered  by  every  tongue;  and  besides  our  desire  to  be 
taught  by  their  lips,  we  should,  as  disciples  of  St.  Paul,  have  felt  a 
natural  anxiety  to  know  whether  'James,  Cephas,  and  John,  m\\o 
seemed  to  be  pillars,  added  nothing  to'  (Gal.  ii,  6,  9),  and  took 
nothing  from,  the  substance  of  the  doctrine  which  we  had  received 
through  him.  .  .  .  We  have  words  from  these  very  apostles,  ex- 
pressing the  mind  of  their  later  life,  words  in  which  we  recognise 
the  mellow  tone  of  age,  the  settled  manner  of  an  old  experience, 
and  the  long  habit  of  Christian  thought." ' 

The  Apocalypse  of  John  is,  as  we  have  seen  (pp.  466-493),  a 
magnificent  expansion  of  the  eschatological  prophecy  The  Apocalypse 
of  our  Lord  in  Matt.  xxiv.  It  is  professedly  a  further  sjonoUhe^New 
revelation  from  the  Lord  Jesus  himself  (Rev.  i,  1).  As  Test,  canon. 
Paul's  Thessalonian  Epistles,  containing  his  prophecies  of  the  pa- 
rousia  and  the  end  of  the  age,  were  earlier  in  date  than  his  other 

only  the  natural  eifect  of  the  greater  fulness  of  that  light;  for  so  the  moonbeams  fix 
the  eye  upon  themselves,  as  they  burst  through  the  rifts  of  rolling  clouds,  catching 
the  edges  of  objects  and  falling  on  patches  of  landscape ;  while,  under  the  settled 
brightness  of  the  universal  and  genial  day,  it  is  not  so  much  the  light  that  we  think 
of,  as  the  varied  scene  which  it  shows." — Progress  of  Doctrine,  p.  156. 
'  Progress  of  Doctrine,  pp.  161,  165. 
37 


578  PRINCIPLES   OF 

writings,  so  John's  book  of  eschatology  antedates  his  gospel.  But 
there  is  a  fitness  in  having  the  Book  of  Revelation  close  the  New 
Testament  canon,  even  as  the  Thessalonian  Epistles  stand  in  canon- 
ical order  at  the  close  of  Paul's  letters  to  seven  different  churches.^ 
For  the  Apocalypse  reveals  the  marvellous  things  of  the  parousia, 
and  the  consummation  of  that  age,  when  both  earth  and  heavens 
were  shaken,  and  the  former  things  passed  away  in  order  to  give 
place  to  the  Messianic  kingdom,  which  cannot  be  shaken  (Heb. 
xii,  26-28).  No  vision  could  more  appropriately  close  the  Christ- 
ian Canon  than  the  apocalyptic  symbol  of  the  heavenly  and  eternal 
kingdom. 

This  i-apid  outline  of  the  development  and  progress  of  doctrine, 
Attention  to  traceable  in  the  several  books  of  the  Old  and  New 
progress  of  doc-  Testament  Scriptures,  will  serve  to  show  that  God  did 

tnne  a  help  to  ...  rn 

the  interpreter,  not  communicate  his  revelations  all  at  once.  The  suc- 
cessive portions  which  he  revealed  from  time  to  time  were  adapted 
to  the  varying  conditions  and  needs  of  his  people.  Sometimes  the 
word  was  left  defective  because  of  the  hardness  of  the  people's 
hearts  (Mark  x,  5).  Sometimes  the  progress  was  slow,  and  inter- 
rui)ted  by  long  periods  of  spiritual  decline;  then  again  it  broke 
forth  in  new  developments  of  national  life.  A  careful  attention  to 
this  progressive  character  of  the  divine  i*evelation  is  necessary  to  a 
thorough  interpretation  and  efficient  use  of  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
It  helps  to  set  aside  the  charges  of  doctrinal  and  ethical  discrep- 
ancies which  have  been  alleged.  The  notion  that  the  Pauline  doc- 
trine of  justification  is  something  essentially  different  from  the 
teachings  of  Jesus,  will  have  no  force  when  it  is  seen  that  the  whole 
Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  virtually  a  systematic  elaboration  of  our 
Lord's  words  to  Nicodemus  :  "  God  so  loved  the  world  that  he  gave 
his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  on  him  should  not 
perish,  but  have  eternal  life"  (John  iii,  16).  The  allegation  that 
the  New  Testament  contradicts  the  Old  is  seen  to  be  an  error  Avhen 
we  discover  that  the  older  revelations  were  necessarily  imperfect, 
and  manifestlv  not  desiscned  to  set  forth  all  the  truth  of  God. 
Things  which  from  one  standpoint  seem  to  be  contradictory,  from 
another  are  seen  to  be  only  separated  portions  of  one  grand  har- 
mony. The  lex  tallonis  and  the  violent  procedures  of  the  blood- 
avenjrer  were  grounded  in  the  righteous  demands  of  retributive 
justice,  and  were  archaic  forms  of  executing  law.  A  higher  civil- 
ization, based  on  clearer  revelations,  adopts  other  methods  of  exe- 
cuting penalty,  but  recognises  the  same  essential  principles  of  right, 

'  Comp.  Bernard,  Progress  of  Doctrine,  p.  169. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  579 


The  Analogy  of  Faith. 

The  foregoing  observations  prepare  the  way  to  a  proper  appre- 
hension of  the  "Analogy  of  Faith"  as  an  aid  in  ex-  progress  of  doc- 
pounding  the  Scriptures.  This  expression,  appropri-  f^^\j.  ^^p^'^'^^ 
ated  from  Rom.  xii,  6,  but  used  in  a  different  sense  ogy  of  Faith. 
from  that  which  the  apostle  intended/  denotes  that  general  har- 
mony of  fundamental  doctrine  which  pervades  the  entire  Scriptures. 
It  assumes  that  the  Bible  is  a  self-interpreting  book,  and  what  is 
obscure  in  one  passage  may  be  illuminated  by  another.  No  single 
statement  or  obscure  passage  of  one  book  can  be  allowed  to  set 
aside  a  doctrine  which  is  clearly  established  by  many  passages. 
The  obscure  texts  must  be  interpreted  in  the  light  of  those  which 
are  plain  and  positive.  "  The  faith,"  says  Fairbairn,  "  according  to 
which  the  sense  of  particular  passages  is  determined,  must  be  that 
which  rests  upon  the  broad  import  of  some  of  the  most  explicit 
announcements  of  Scripture,  about  the  meaning  of  which  there  can 
be,  with  unbiassed  minds,  no  reasonable  doubt.  And  in  so  far  as 
we  must  decide  between  one  passage  and  another,  those  passages 
should  always  be  allowed  greatest  weight  in  fixing  the  general 
principles  of  the  faith  in  which  the  subjects  belonging  to  it  are  not 
incidentally  noticed  merely,  but  formally  treated  and  discussed; 
for,  in  such  cases,  we  can  have  no  doubl  that  the  point  on  which 
we  seek  for  an  authoritative  deliverance  was  distinctly  in  the  eye 
of  the  writer."'* 

^  In  Rom.  xii,  6,  the  apostle  is  speaking  of  the  gifts,  ;j;apj(T//aTa,  the  spiritual  quali- 
fications and  aptitudes  for  Christian  activity  and  usefulness  in  the  Church,  "gifts 
differing  according  to  the  grace  given"  to  each  individual.  Of  these  varying  gifts  he 
specifies  several  examples,  one  of  which  is  that  of  prophesying.  Let  the  one  thus 
gifted,  he  says,  exercise  his  gift,  Kara  rrjv  avaloylav  ttjq  nlaTeug,  according  to  the  pro- 
portion of  the  faith,  that  is,  the  faith  which  he  individually  possesses.  This  propor- 
tion or  analogy  {avaXoyla)  of  one's  individual  faith  is  not  an  external  rule  or  doctrinal 
standard,  the  rcgula  fidei  (as  Philippi,  Hodge,  and  others  hold),  but  the  measure  of 
faith  with  which  each  is  endowed.  "  They  are  not  to  depart  from  the  proportional 
measure  which  their  faith  has,  neither  wishing  to  exceed  it,  nor  falling  short  of  it,  but 
are  to  guide  themselves  by  it,  and  are  therefore  so  to  announce  and  interpret  the  received 
revelation,  as  the  peculiar  position  in  respect  of  faith  bestowed  on  them,  according 
to  the  strength,  fervour,  clearness,  and  other  qualities  of  that  faith,  suggests — so  that 
the  character  and  mode  of  their  speaking  is  conformed  to  the  rules  and  limits,  which 
are  implied  in  the  proportion  of  their  individual  degree  of  faith.  In  the  contrary  case 
they  fall,  in  respect  of  contents  and  of  form,  into  a  mode  of  prophetic  utterance,  either 
excessive  and  overstrained,  or,  on  the  other  hand,  insufficient  and  defective,  not  corre- 
sponding to  the  level  of  their  faith.  The  same  revelation  may,  in  fact — according  to 
the  difference  in  the  proportion  of  faith  with  which  it,  objectively  given,  subjectively 
connects  itself — be  very  differently  expressed  and  delivered." — Meyer,  in  loco. 

*  Hermeneutical  Manual,  p.  128. 


580  PRI^^CIPLES   OF 

We  may  distinguish  two  degrees  of  the  analogy  of  faith.     The 

__   ^  first  and  highest  is  positive,  in  which  tlie  doctrine  or 

Twodeprrees  .°  ,    .    , 

of  the  analogy  revelation  IS  so  plainly  and  positively  stated,  and  sup- 

of  faith.  ported  by  so  many  distinct  passages,  that  there  can  be 

no  doubt  of  its  meaning  and  value.  Thus  the  Scriptures  teach  posi- 
tively that  all  men  are  sinners;  that  God  has  provided  redemption 
for  all;  that  God  is  omnipotent,  omnipresent,  omniscient,  holy, 
righteous,  and  merciful;  that  he  requires  in  those  who  seek  his 
grace,  repentance,  faith,  humility,  love,  and  obedience: 
that  he  purposes  to  save  and  glorify  those  who  love  and 
serve  him,  and  to  punish  those  who  disobey  and  hate  him.  These 
and  many  similar  great  truths  are  so  positively  and  repeatedly  set 
forth  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  that  no  one  who  reads  with  care  can 
fail  to  apprehend  them. 

The  next  degree  is  appropriately  called  the  general  analogy  of 
faith.  It  rests  not  like  the  first  upon  explicit  declara- 
tions, but  upon  the  obvious  scope  and  import  of  the 
Scripture  teachings  taken  as  a  whole.  Thus,  for  example,  the  sub- 
ject of  human  slavery  is  referred  to  in  various  ways,  both  in  the 
Old  Testament  and  in  the  New.  Some  passages  have  been  con- 
strued as  sanctioning  the  jjractice,  others  as  opposing  and  condemn- 
ing it.  A  valid  conclusion  as  to  the  general  import  of  Scripture  on 
this  subject  can  be  reached  only  by  a  broad  and  thorough  inves- 
tigation of  all  that  bears  upon  it  in  the  revelation  of  God.  The 
Mosaic  legislation,  which  exj^ressly  permits  the  buying  of  slaves 
from  foreigners  (Lev.  xxv,  44,  45),  makes  the  stealing  and  selling 
of  a  Hebrew  a  capital  crime  (Exod.  xxi,  IG;  Dent,  xxiv,  T).  A 
leading  feature  of  the  Mosaic  system  was  to  distinguish  sharply 
between  the  Israelite  and  the  foreigner,  always  to  the  prejudice  of 
the  latter.  This  fact  must  be  kept  in  mind  in  discussing  any  sub- 
ject of  Mosaic  ethics.  No  Hebrew  could,  without  his  own  consent, 
be  retained  in  slavery  more  than  six  years  (Exod.  xxi,  2),  and  the 
year  of  jubilee  might  terminate  the  bondage  sooner  (Lev.  xxv, 
40,  54).  Paul  counsels  the  Christian  slaves  to  be  obedient  to  their 
masters  (Eph.  vi,  5;  Col.  iii,  22;  1  Tim.  vi,  1,  2),  but  he  sends 
back  the  fugitive,  Onesimus,  to  his  master,  "no  longer  a  slave,  but 
more  than  a  slave,  a  brother  beloved"  (Philem.  16).  He  proclaims, 
moreover,  that  under  the  Gospel  "  there  is  neither  Jew  nor  Greek, 
there  is  neither  bond  nor  free,  there  is  no  male  and  female  "  (Gal. 
iii,  28).  The  putting  on  of  Christ  by  being  baptized  into  Christ  (ver. 
27)  causes  all  distinctions  of  nation  (comjx  Rom.  x,  12),  condition, 
and  even  of  sex,  to  be  wholly  lost  sight  of  and  forgotten.  AVhen  to 
these  and  other  similar  teachings  we  add  the  consideration  that  the 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  581 

Old  Testament  commandment,  "  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as 
thyself,"  dropped  somewhat  incidentally  in  the  Mosaic  legislation 
(Lev.  xix,  18),  is  called  by  James  "the  royal  law  "  (James  ii,  8),  and 
is  announced  by  the  Lord  as  a  fundamental  pillar  of  the  divine 
revelation  (Matt,  xxii,  39;  Mark  xii,  31  ;  Luke  x,  27),  we  can 
scarcely  doubt  that  the  holding  of  any  fellow  being  in  bondage 
against  his  will  is  essentially  contrary  to  the  highest  ethics.  The 
general  analogy  of  faith  is  thus  made  apparent  by  a  broad  and 
careful  collation  of  all  that  the  Scripture  says  on  any  given  sub- 
ject.' 

It  is  evident  that  no  doctrine  which  rests  upon  a  single  passage 
of  Scripture  can  belong  to  fundamental  doctrines  rec-  .^  ^.^^ 
ognised  in  the,  analogy  of  faith.  But  it  must  not  be  uses  of  the  anai- 
inferred  from  this  that  no  specific  statement  of  Scrip-  °^  °  ^^^^' 
ture  is  authoritative  unless  it  has  support  in  other  passages.  Nor 
can  we  set  aside  any  legitimate  inference  from  a  statement  of 
Scripture  on  the  ground  that  such  inference  is  unsupported  by  other 
parallel  statements.  Unless  it  be  clearly  contradicted  or  excluded 
by  the  analogy  of  faith,  or  by  some  other  equally  explicit  state- 
ment, one  positive  declaration  of  God's  word  is  sufficient  to  estab- 
lish either  a  fact  or  a  doctrine.  Hence  the  analogy  of  faith  as  a 
principle  of  interpretation  is  necessarily  limited  in  its  application. 
It  is  useful  in  bringing  out  the  relative  importance  and  prominence 
of  different  doctrines,  and  guarding  against  a  one-sided  exposition 
of  the  sacred  oracles.  It  exhibits  the  inner  unity  and  harmony  of 
the  entire  divine  revelation.  It  magnifies  the  importance  of  con- 
sistency in  interpretation.  But  it  cannot  govern  the  interpreter  in 
the  exposition  of  those  parts  of  the  Scriptures  which  are  without 
real  parallel,  and  which  stand  unopposed  by  other  parts.  For  it 
may  justly  be  inferred  from  the  progress  of  doctrine  in  the  Bible 
that  here  and  there  single  revelations  of  divine  truth  may  have 
been  given  in  passages  where  the  context  furnished  no  occasion  for 
further  development  or  elaboration. 

'Celerier  (Manuel  d'Hermeneutique,  pp.  194-196)  specifies  two  inferior  degrees  of 
analogy  which  he  defines  as  deduced  and  imposed;  but  he  very  properly  observes  that 
they  are  unworthy  of  the  name  of  analogy  of  faith ;  for  the  one  rests  upon  the  logi- 
cal process  by  which  it  is  attempted  to  prove  a  doctrine,  the  other  upon  an  assumed 
authority  supposed  to  inhere  in  the  consensus  of  the  creeds  of  Christendom.  The  con- 
sensus or  analogy  of  Christian  creeds  is  not  without  its  value,  but  to  use  it  as  a  method 
of  interpreting  Scripture  is  to  substitute  authority  in  the  place  of  rational  principles 
and  rules  of  hermeneutics.  What  is  believed  everywhere,  always,  and  by  all  (Quod 
ubique,  quod  semper,  quod  ab  omnibus  creditum  est),  is,  doubtless,  worthy  of  serious 
consideration,  but  cannot  be  admitted  as  a  means  of  unfolding  the  sense  of  any  par- 
ticular portions  of  the  Bible. 


582  PRINCIPLES   OF 


CHAPTER  XXXIV. 

DOCTRINAL    AND    PRACTICAL    USB    OF    SCRIPTURE. 

Paul,  the  apostle,  declares  that  all  Scripture  which  is  divinely  in- 
Paui's  state-  spired  is  also  profitable  for  teaching,  for  reproof,  for 
meut  of  the   con'ection,  for  instruction  in  righteousness  (2  Tim.  iii, 

uses  of   Scrip-  '  .  ,.     i        i     ,  i 

ture.  IG).     These  various  uses  of  the  holy  records  may  be 

distinguished  as  doctrinal  and  practical.  The  Christian  teacher 
appeals  to  them  as  authoritative  utterances  of  divine  truth,  and  un- 
folds their  lessons  as  theoretical  and  doctrinal  statements  of  what 
their  divine  author  would  have  men  believe.  Our  fifth  Article  of 
Religion  (the  sixth  of  the  Church  of  England)  says:  "  The  Holy 
Scriptures  contain  all  things  necessary  to  salvation;  so  that  what- 
soever is  not  read  therein,  nor  may  be  proved  thereby,  is  not  to  be 
required  of  any  man  that  it  should  be  believed  as  an  article  of  faith, 
or  be  thought  requisite  or  necessary  to  salvation."  The  inspired 
word,  moreover,  serves  a  most  important  practical  purpose  by  fur- 
nishing conviction  and  reproof  (eXeyxov,  or  eAeyfiov)  for  the  sinful, 
correction  {Enav6pdu)aiv)  for  the  fallen  and  erring,  and  instruction 
or  disciplinary  training  (naideiav)  for  all  who  would  become  sancti- 
fied by  the  truth  (comp.  John  xvii,  17)  and  perfected  in  the  ways 
of  righteousness. 

The  Roman  Church,  as  is  well  known,  denies  the  right  of  private 
Roman  rtoc-  judgment  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures,  and 
trine  of  inter-  condemns  the  exercise  of  that  right  as  the  source  of  all 
ciiurcti author-  heresy  and  schism.  The  third  article  of  the  creed  of 
"y*  Pope  Pius  IV.,  which  is  one  of  the  most  authoritative 

expressions  of  Roman  faith,  reads  as  follows:  "I  admit  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  according  to  that  sense  which  our  holy  mother  Church 
has  held  and  docs  hold,  to  which  it  belongs  to  judge  of  the  true 
sense  and  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures ;  neither  will  I  ever  take 
and  interpret  them  otherwise  than  according  to  the  unanimous  con- 
sent of  the  fathers."  '  The  Romanist,  therefore,  finds  in  the  Church 
and  tradition  an  authority  superior  to  the  inspired  Scripture.  But 
Avhen  we  find  that  the  fathers  notoriously  disagree  in  the  exposition 
of  important  passages,  that  pojH's  have  contradicted  one  another, 
and  have  condemned  and  annulled  the  acts  of  their  ])redecess(>rs, 

'  Comp.  SchafF,  The  Creeds  of  Christendom,  vol.  i,  pp.  96-99 ;  vol.  ii,  p.  207.  New 
York,  1877. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  583 

r.nd  that  even  great  councils,  like  those  of  Nice  (325),  Laodicea 
(360),  Constantinople  (764),  and  Trent  (1545)  have  enacted  decrees 
utterly  inconsistent  with  each  other,'  we  may  safely  reject  the  pre- 
tensions of  the  Romanists,  and  pronounce  them  absurd  and  prepos- 
terous. 

The  Protestant,  on  the  other  hand,  maintains  the  right  of  exer- 
cising his  own  reason  and  judgment  in  the  study  of  the  The  Protestant 
Scriptures.  But  he  humbly  acknowledges  the  fallibility  uTi  ng'^o^ne's 
of  all  men,  not  excepting  any  of  the  popes  of  Rome,  own  reason. 
He  observes  that  there  are  portions  of  the  Bible  which  are  diffi- 
cult to  explain;  he  also  observes  that  no  Roman  pontiff,  whatever 
his  claim  of  infallibility,  has  ever  made  them  clear.  He  is  con- 
vinced, furthermore,  that  there  are  many  passages  of  holy  writ  on 
which  good  and  wise  men  may  agree  to  differ,  and  some  of  which  no 
one  may  be  able  to  interpret.  By  far  the  greater  portion  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments  is  so  clear  in  general  import  that  there  is  no 
room  for  controversy,  and  those  parts  which  are  obscure  contain  no 
fundamental  truth  or  doctrine  which  is  not  elsewhere  set  forth  in 
clearer  form.  Protestants,  accordingly,  hold  it  to  be  not  only  a 
right  but  a  duty  of  all  Christians  to  search  the  Scriptures,  that  they 
may  know  for  themselves  the  will  and  commandments  of  God.* 

But  while  the  Holy  Scriptures  contain  all  essential  revelation  of 
divine  truth,  "so  that  whatsoever  is  not  read  therein,  statement  and 
nor  may  be  proved  thereby,  is  not  to  be  required  of  any  defence  of  doc- 

,         .       1        1  1   1       1     T         J  ^-1        i?  J?   •  4.1,  5  J    trins  to  conform 

man  that  it  should  be  believed  as  an  article  ot  taith,  to  correct  Mer- 
it is  of  fundamental  importance  that  all  formal  state-  meneutics. 
ments  of  biblical  doctrine,  and  the  exposition,  elaboration,  or  de- 
fence of  the  same,  be  made  in  accordance  with  correct  hermeneutical 
principles.  The  systematic  expounder  of  Scripture  doctrine  is  ex- 
pected to  set  forth,  in  clear  outline  and  well-detined  terms,  such 
teachings  as  have  certain  warrant  in  the  word  of  God.  He  must  not 
import  into  the  text  of  Scripture  the  ideas  of  later  times,  or  build 
upon  any  words  or  passages  a  dogma  which  they  do  not  legitimately 
teach.  The  apologetic  and  dogmatic  methods  of  interpretation 
which  proceed  from  the  standpoint  of  a  formulated  creed,  and  ap- 
peal to  all  words  and  sentiments  scattered  here  and  there  in  the 

'  See  the  proof  of  these  statements  in  Elliott,  Delineation  of  Roman  Catholicism, 
vol.  i,  pp.  144-147.     New  York,  1841. 

-  "If  a  position  is  demonstrably  scriptural,"  says  Dorner,  "according  to  the  evan- 
gelical doctrine  of  the  Church,  it  has  an  essentially  ecclesiastical  character;  it  has 
-citizenship  and  a  claim  to  regard  even  though  it  do  not  enjoy  a  formal  validity ;  and 
a  position  which  is  demonstrably  opposed  to  Scripture  has  similarly  no  claim  to  ac- 
ceptance though  it  be  ecclesiastical." — System  of  Christian  Doctrine,  vol.  i,  p.  176. 
Edinb.,  1880. 


584  PRINCIPLES   OP 

Scriptures,  whicli  may  by  any  possibility  lend  support  to  a  foregone 
conclusion,  have  been  condemned  already  (see  above,  pp.  171,  172). 
By  such  methods  many  false  notions  have  been  urged  upon  men  as 
matters  of  faith.  But  no  man  ha^  a  right  to  foist  into  his  exposi- 
tions of  Scripture  his  own  dogmatic  conceptions,  or  those  of  others, 
and  then  insist  that  these  are  an  essential  part  of  divine  revelation. 
Only  that  which  is  clearly  read  therein,  or  legitimately  proved 
thereby,  can  be  properly  held  as  scriptural  doctrine.' 

We  should,  however,  clearly  discriminate  between  biblical  theol- 
Bibiicai  and  ogy.  and  the  historical  and  systematic  development  of 
histoncai  the-   d^i-i^tian  doctrine.     Many  fundamental  truths  are  set 

ology  to  be  dis-  •' 

tinguisiied.  forth  in  fragmentary  forms,  or  by  implication,  in  the 
Scriptures;  but  in  the  subsequent  life  and  thought  of  the  Church, 
they  have  been  brought  out  by  thorough  elaboration,  and  the  for- 
mulated statements  of  individuals  and  ecclesiastical  councils.^  All 
the  great  creeds  and  confessions  of  Christendom  assume  to  be  in 
harmony  with  the  written  word  of  God,  and  manifestly  have  great 
historical  value ;  but  they  contain  not  a  few  statements  of  doctrine 
which  a  legitimate  interpretation  of  the  Scripture  proof-texts  ap- 
pealed to  does  not  authorize.  A  fundamental  principle  of  Protes- 
tantism is  that  the  Scriptures  only  are  the  true  sources  of  doctrine, 
A  creed  has  no  authority  further  than  it  clearly  rests  upon  what 
God  has  spoken  by  his  inspired  prophets  and  apostles.  All  true 
Christian  doctrine  is  contained  in  substance  in  the  canonical  Scrip- 
tures.^    But  the  elaborate  study  and  exposition  of  subsequent  ages 

"  "In  the  domain  of  Christian  doctrine,"  says  Van  Oosterzee,  "the  Scripture  is 
rightly  made  use  of,  when  it  is  duly  tested,  interpreted  according  to  precise  rules,  em- 
ployed in  explaining,  purifying,  and  developing  Church  confessions,  and  is  consulted 
as  a  guide  in  individual  Christian  philosophic  investigation  of  truth." — Christian  Dog- 
matics, vol.  i,  pp.  220,  221.    New  York,  1874. 

*  Thus  Martensen :  "  As  the  archetypal  work  of  the  Spirit  of  Inspiration,  the  Scrip- 
tures include  within  themselves  a  world  of  germs  for  a  continuous  develoi)ment. 
While  every  dogmatic  system  grows  old,  the  Bible  remains  eternally  young,  because  it 
does  not  give  us  a  systematic  presentation  of  truth,  but  truth  in  its  fulness,  involving 
the  possibility  of  a  variety  of  systems." — Christian  Dogmatics,  p.  52.    Edinb.,  18G6. 

^  "The  liistoryof  doctrines,"  says  Ilagenbach,  "presupposes  biblical  theology  as  its 
basis ;  just  as  the  general  history  of  the  Church  presupposes  the  life  of  Jesus  and  the 
apostolic  age." — Text-Book  of  the  History  of  Doctrines,  p.  16.  Eng.  trans.,  revised 
by  II.  B.  Smith,  New  York,  18G1.  lie  observes  further  (p.  44):  "With  the  incarna- 
tion of  the  Redeemer,  and  the  introduction  of  Christianity  into  the  world,  the  materi- 
als of  the  history  of  doctrines  are  already  fully  given  in  the  germ.  The  object  of  all 
further  doctrinal  statements  and  definitions  is,  in  the  positive  point  of  view,  to  unfold 
this  germ ;  in  the  negative,  to  guard  it  against  all  foreign  additions  and  influences." 
Similarly  Schaff :  "  In  the  Protestant  system,  the  authority  of  symbols,  as  of  all  human 
compositions,  is  relative  and  limited.     It  is  not  co-ordinate  with,  but  always  subordinate 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  585 

may  be  presumed  to  have  put  some  things  in  clearer  light,  and  the 
judgments  expressed  by  venerable  councils  are  entitled  to  great 
respect  and  deference. 

Most  of  the  great  controversies  on  Christian  doctrine  have  grown 
out  of  attempts  to  define  what  is  left  in  the  Scriptures  Human  tend- 
undefined.     The  mysteries  of  the  nature  of  God,  the   encytobewise 

•'  _  _       _  '  above  what  is 

person  and  work  of  Jesus  Christ,  sacrificial  atone-  written. 
ment  in  its  relations  to  divine  justice,  man's  depraved  nature 
and  the  relative  possibilities  of  the  human  soul  with  and  withoiit 
the  light  of  the  Gospel,  the  method  -  of  regeneration,  and  the  de- 
grees of  possible  Christian  attainment,  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead,  and  the  mode  of  immortality  and  eternal  judgment — these 
and  kindred  subjects  are  of  a  nature  to  invite  speculation  and  vain 
theorizing,  and  it  was  most  natural  that  everything  in  the  Scripture 
bearing  on  such  points  should  have  been  pressed  into  service.  On 
such  mysterious  themes  it  is  quite  easy  for  men  to  become  "  wise 
above  Avhat  is  written,"  and  in  the  historical  development  of  the 
blended  life,  thought,  and  activities  of  the  Church,  some  things 
came  to  be  generally  accepted  as  essential  Christian  doctrine  which 
in  fact  are  without  sufficient  warrant  in  the  Scriptures. 

Inasmuch,  then,  as  the  Scriptures  are  the  sole  source  of  revealed 
doctrine,  and  were  given  for  the  purpose  of  making  True  and  false 
known  to  men  the  saving  truth  of  God,  it  is  of  the  ut-  J^rtaS^  scr^^ 
most  importance  that  we  study,  by  sound  hermeneutical  ture  doctrines. 
methods,  to  ascertain  from  them  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but 
the  truth.  We  may  best  illustrate  our  meaning  by  taking  several 
leading  doctrines  of  the  Christian  faith,  and  indicating  the  unsound 
and  untenable  methods  by  which  their  advocates  have  sometimes 
defended  them. 

Nothing  is  more  fundamental  in  any  system  of  religion  than  the 

doctrine  of  God,  and  the  catholic  faith  of  the  early  ^^      ^^  ,.   , 

'  .  .   •'     The  catholic  doc- 

Christian   Church,  as  formulated  in   the   Athanasian  trine  of  God. 

Creed,  is  this : 

That  we  worship  one  God  in  Trinity,  and  Trinity  in  Unity;  neither  con- 
foundinGj  the  Persons,  nor  dividing  the  substance.  For  there  is  one  Person 
of  tlie  Father;  another  of  the  Son;  and  another  of  tlie  Holy  Spirit.  But 
the  Godhead  of  the  Father,  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  all  one: 
the  glory  equal,  the  majesty  co-eternal.     Such  as  the  Father  is,  such  is  the 

to,  the  Bible,  as  the  only  infallible  rule  of  the  Christian  faith  and  practice.  The 
value  of  creeds  depends  upon  the  measure  of  their  agreement  with  the  Scriptures.  In 
the  best  case  a  human  creed  is  only  an  approximate  and  relatively  correct  exposition 
of  revealed  truth,  and  may  be  improved  by  the  progressive  knowledge  of  the  Church, 
while  the  Bible  remains  perfect  and  infallible." — The  Creeds  of  Christendom,  vol.  i,  p.  7. 


586  PRINCIPLES   OF 

Son,  and  such  is  the  Holy  Spirit:  The  Father  uncreated,  tlie  Son  uncre- 
ated, and  the  Holy  Spirit  uncreated;  the  Father  incomprehensible  (immen- 
sus),  the  Son  incomprehensible,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  incomprehensible ;  the 
Father  eternal,  the  Son  eternal,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  eternal.  And  yet  there 
are  not  three  Eternals,  but  one  Eternal ;  as  also  there  are  not  three  uncre- 
ated, nor  three  incomprehensibles,  but  One  uncreated,  and  One  incompre- 
hensible. So  likewise  the  Father  is  Almighty,  the  Son  Almighty,  and  the 
Holy  Spirit  Almighty;  and  yet  there  are  not  three  Almighties,  but  one 
Almighty.  So  the  Father  is  God,  the  Sou  is  God,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
•God  ;  and  yet  there  are  not  three  Gods,  but  one  God. 

Here  is  a  very  succinct  and  explicit  statement  of  doctrine,  and 
its  definitions,  so  far  as  quoted  above,  have  obtained  all  but  uni- 
versal acceptance  among  evangelical  believers.  Though  commonly 
ascribed  to  Athanasius,  this  symbol  of  faith,  like  the  Apostles' 
Creed,  is  of  unknown  authorship,  and  furnishes  one  of  the  most 
remarkable  examples  of  the  extraordinary  influence  Avhich  some 
works  of  that  kind  have  exerted. 

But  are  the  definitions  and  sharp  distinctions  set  forth  in  this 
Doetrinai  svm-  ^^'^^^  according  to  the  Scriptures?  May  we  read  them 
bois   not   un-  therein,  or  prove  them  thereby?     No  one  pretends  that 

^  "^  ■  the  several  clauses,  or  any  of  the  formal  definitions,  are 
taken  from  the  Bible.  All  such  systematic  presentations  of  dogma 
are  foreign  to  the  style  of  the  Scriptures ;  but  this  fact  is  no  valid 
reason  for  rejecting  them,  or  supposing  them  to  be  unscriptural. 
^'  A  creed,"  says  Schafi",  "  ought  to  use  language  different  from  that 
of  the  Bible,  A  string  of  Scripture  passages  would  be  no  creed  at 
all,  as  little  as  it  would  be  a  prayer  or  a  hymn.  A  creed  is,  as  it 
were,  a  doctrinal  poem  written  under  the  inspiration  of  divine  truth. 
This  may  be  said  at  least  of  the  oecumenical  creeds." '  Hence  a 
well-constructed  creed  is  supposed  to  express  the  sum  total  of  what 
the  Scriptures  teach  on  a  given  subject,  but  not  necessarily  in  the 
language  or  terms  of  the  sacred  writers.  Nor  are  its  statements  to 
be  supposed  to  depend  on  any  one  or  two  particular  texts  or  pas- 
sages of  the  Bible.  It  is  quite  possible  that  the  general  judgment 
of  men  may  legitimately  accept  as  a  positive  doctrine  of  Scripture 
what  no  one  text  or  passage,  taken  by  itself  alone,  would  be  suffi- 
cient to  authorize.  The  catholic  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  is  very 
much  of  this  character.  A  calm  and  dispassionate  review  of  ages 
of  controversy  over  this  important  dogma  will  show  that,  on  the 
one  hand,  the  advocates  of  the  catholic  faith  have  made  an  unscien- 
tific and  inconclusive  use  of  many  Scripture  texts,  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  their  opponents  have  been  equally  unfair  in  rejecting 
'  The  Creeds  of  Christendom,  vol.  i,  p.  7,  foot  note. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  587 

the  logical  and  legitimate  conclusion  of  a  cumulative  argument 
which  rested  on  the  evidence  of  many  biblical  statements,  of  which 
they  themselves  could  furnish  no  sufficient  or  satisfactory  explana- 
tion. The  argument  from  each  text  may  be  nullified  or  largely  set 
aside,  when  taken  singly  and  alone ;  but  a  great  number  and  variety 
of  such  evidences,  taken  as  a  whole,  and  exhibiting  a  manifest  co- 
herency, may  not  thus  be  set  aside. 

Thus,  for  example,  the  plural  form  of  the  name  of  God  (D%i7S) 
in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  has  often  been  adduced  as  ^  ^^ 

proof  of  a  plurality  of  persons  in  the  Godhead.  A  sim-  the  name  of 
ilar  application  has  been  made  of  the  threefold  use  of 
the  divine  name  in  the  priestly  blessing  (Num.  vi,  24-27),  and  the 
trisagion  in  Isa.  vi,  3,  Even  the  proverb,  "  A  threefold  cord  is  not 
quickly  broken"  (Eccles.  iv,  12),  has  been  quoted  as  a  proof-text  of 
the  Trinity.  Such  a  use  of  Scripture  will  not  be  likely  to  advance 
the  interests  of  truth,  or  be  profitable  for  doctrine.  A  repetition 
of  the  divine  name  three  or  more  times  is  no  evidence  that  the  wor- 
shipper thereby  intends  a  reference  to  so  many  pei'sonal  distinctions 
in  the  divine  natm-e.  The  plural  form  ^''^bii  may  as  well  designate 
a  multiplicity  of  divine  potentialities  in  the  deity  as  three  personal 
distinctions,  or  it  may  be  explained  as  the  plural  of  majesty  and 
excellency  (see  p.  86).  Such  forms  of  expression  are  susceptible 
of  too  many  explanations  to  be  used  as  valid  proof  texts  of  the 
Trinity. 

So,  again,  of  the  passage  in  Gen.  xix,  24,  often  quoted  in  the 
Trinitarian  controversies.  "The  name  Jehovah,"  says  Language  of 
Watson,  "  if  it  has  not  a  plural  form,  has  more  than  one  ^^°-  ^^^<  2*- 
personal  application.  '  Then  the  Lord  rained  upon  Sodom  and  upon 
Gomorrah  brimstone  and  fire  from  the  Lord  out  of  heaven.'  We 
have  here  the  visible  Jehovah  who  had  talked  with  Abraham  rain- 
ing the  storm  of  vengeance  from  another  Jehovah  out  of  heaven, 
and  who  was,  therefore,  invisible.  Thus  we  have  two  Jehovahs 
expressly  mentioned,  '  the  Lord  rained  from  the  Lord,'  and  yet  we 
have  it  most  solemnly  asserted  in  Deut.  vi,  4,  'Hear,  O  Israel, 
Jehovah  our  God  is  one  Jehovah.' "  '  Much  more  natural  and  sim- 
ple, however,  is  the  explanation  which  recognises  in  this  repetition 
of  the  name  Jehovah  a  Hebraistic  mode  of  statement.  "It  is," 
says  Calvin,  "an  emphatic  repetition."  Browne  remarks:  "Aben 
Ezra,  whom  perhaps  a  majority  of  Christian  commentators  have 
followed  in  this,  sees  in  these  words  a  i^eculiar  '  elegance  or  grace 
of  language;'  'the  Lord  rained  from  the  Lord'  being  a  grander 
and  more  impressive  mode  of  saying, '  the  Lord  rained  from  himself.' 
'  Theological  Institutes,  vol.  i,  p.  467. 


588  PRENCIPLES    OF 

It  is  a  common  idiom  in  Hebrew  to  repeat  the  noun  instead  of 
using  a  pronoun." ' 

The  theophanies  of  the  Old  Testament  have  also  been  adduced 
Angel  of  Jeho-  i"  maintaining  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  But  what- 
^ah.  ever  else  may  be  made  of  the  argument,  it  furnishes  no 

sound  proof  that  the  Godhead  consists  of  a  number  of  distinct 
persons.  The  Angel  of  Jehovah,  so  mysteriously  identified  Avith 
Jehovah  himself  (Gen.  xvi,  7,  10,  13;  xxii,  11,  12,  15,  16),  and  in 
whom  is  the  name  of  Jehovah  (Exod.  xxiii,  21),  is  not  necessarily  a 
manifestation  of  one  person  of  the  Godhead  rather  than  another, 
but  may  be  explained  as  a  singular  manifestation  of  Jehovah  him- 
self without  any  idea  of  personal  distinctions  in  his  nature  or 
essence.  But  while  this  is  admitted  on  the  one  hand,  it  ought  not 
to  be  denied,  on  the  other,  that  in  the  light  of  New  Testament  reve- 
lations of  Christ,  as  the  revealed  wisdom  and  power  of  God,  we 
may  discern  in  the  Old  Testament  Angel  of  Jehovah  a  manifesta- 
tion of  him  who  in  the  fulness  of  time  took  upon  himself  the  form 
of  a  servant,  and  was  made  in  the  likeness  of  men  (Phil,  ii,  V).  It 
was,  moreover,  a  i:)art  of  the  theology  of  the  ancient  synagogue 
that  this  angel  was  the  Shekinah,  or  manifested  power  and  media- 
tion of  God  in  the  world. 

A  similar  disposition  may  be  made  of  many  other  proofs  of  the 
New  Testament  Trinity  which  have  been  cited  from  the  Old  Testament, 
doctrine  of  God.  |^^,|^  passing  into  the  New  Testament  we  cannot  but  be 
impressed  with  the  language  used  in  John  i,  18:  "No  one  has  ever 
seen  God;  God  only  begotten,  who  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father, 
he  made  him  known."  ^  This  remarkable  statement  leads  one  to 
ask,  AVho  is  this  only  begotten  God  who  is  in  the  bosom  of  the 
Father,  and  reveals  God,  or  makes  him  known?  In  the  first  verse 
of  the  same  chapter  he  is  called  the  Word  (6  Xoyoc;),  and  is  said  to 
have  been  "  with  the  God  "  [nQog  rov  i^eov),  and  the  f  ui-ther  statement 

'  Speaker's  Commentary,  in  loco. 

2  The  more  familiar  and  almost  equally  well-supported  reading,  "  only  begotten 
Son,"  conveys  essentially  the  same  mysterious  and  wonderful  suggestion.  "  Both 
readings,"  says  Ilort,  "intrinsically  are  free  from  objection.  The  text  (God  only  l)c- 
gotten),  though  startling  at  first,  simply  combines  in  a  single  phrase  the  two  attributes 
of  the  Logos  marked  before  (i9e6f,  ver.  1,  /lovo-yevT/c,  ver.  14).  Its  sense  is  'One  who 
was  both  deog  and  fiovoyevrjc.^  The  substitution  of  the  familiar  phrase  6  fiovoyevri^ 
vlug  for  the  unique  /lovoyevTjc  i9e6f  would  be  obvious,  and  jiovoyevTjg,  by  its  own  pri- 
mary meaning,  directly  suggested  vlog.  The  converse  substitution  is  inexplicable  by 
any  ordinary  motive  likely  to  affect  transcribers.  There  is  no  evidence  that  the  read- 
ing had  any  controversial  interest  in  ancient  times.  And  the  al)sence  of  the  article 
from  the  more  important  documents  is  fatal  to  tlic  idea  that  0(!  was  an  accidental 
substitution  for  VT;." — Appendix  to  Westcott  ami  Ilort's  Greek  Testament,  p.  74. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  589 

is  made  that  he  "was  God."  Creation  is  ascribed  to  him  (ver.  3), 
and  he  is  declared  to  be  the  life  and  the  light  of  men  (ver.  4). 
This  Word,  it  is  added  in  verse  14,  "became  flesh,  and  taber- 
nacled among  us,  and  we  beheld  his  glory — glory  as  of  an  only  be- 
gotten from  a  Father  full  of  grace  and  truth."  It  is  quite  possible 
that  polemic  writers  may  make  too  much  of  these  wonderful  words. 
What  it  is  to  he  with  the  God,  and  also  to  be  God,  may  well  be  treated 
as  a  mystery  too  deep  for  the  human  mind  to  solve.  The  Word 
which  became  flesh,  according  to  John  i,  14,  may  fairly  be  under- 
stood to  be  identical  with  him  who,  according  to  Paul  in  1  Tim. 
iii,  16,  embodies  "the  mystery  of  godliness;  he  who  was  manifested 
in  the  flesh,  justified  in  the  Spirit,  seen  by  angels,  preached  among 
the  nations,  believed  on  in  the  world,  received  up  in  glory."  This 
can  be  no  other  than  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God  and  Son  of  man. 
When,  now,  we  observe  that  the  apostles  were  commissioned  to 
"go  forth  and  make  disciples  of  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit "  (Matt. 
xxviii,  19;)  that  Paul  invokes  "the  grace  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
and  the  love  of  God,  and  the  communion  of  the  Holy  Spirit,"  to 
be  with  all  the  brethren  of  the  Corinthian  church  (2  Cor.  xiii,  13); 
and  that  John  invokes  grace  and  peace  upon  the  seven  churches  of 
Asia  "from  Him  who  is,  and  who  was,  and  who  is  to  come,  and 
from  the  seven  spirits  which  are  before  his  thi'one,  and  from  Jesus 
Christ,  the  faithful  witness,  the  firstborn  of  the  dead,  and  the 
prince  of  the  kings  of  the  land  "  (Rev.  i,  4,  5),  we  may  with  good 
reason  conclude  that  God,  as  revealed  in  the  New  Testament,  con- 
sists of  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit  existing  in  some  myste-  Mysterious  dis- 
rious  and  incomprehensible  unity  of  nature.  From  tinctionsintbe 
such  a  basis  the  exegete  may  go  on  to  examine  all  those 
texts  which  indicate  in  any  way  the  person,  nature,  and  character 
of  Christ:  his  pre-existence,  his  divine  names  and  titles,  his  holy 
attributes  and  perfections,  his  power  on  earth  to  forgive  sins,  and 
other  prerogatives  and  works  ascribed  to  him,  and  the  command 
for  all  men  and  angels  to  worship  him.  The  fact  that  "  God  is 
Spirit"  (John  iv,  24)  allows  us  readily  to  conceive  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  and  God  himself  are  one  in  substance,  and  the  manner  in 
which  our  Lord  speaks  of  the  Holy  Spirit  as  the  Comforter  whom 
he  will  send  (John  xv,  26;  xvi,  7),  and  whom  the  Father  Avill  send 
in  his  name  (xiv,  26),  points  by  every  fair  construction  to  a  dis- 
tinction between  the  Father  and  the  Holy  Spirit.  Putting  all  these 
together  we  find  so  many  far-reaching  and  profoundly  suggestive 
declarations  concerning  these  divine  persons,  that  we  cannot  logi- 
cally avoid  the  conclusion  enunciated  in  the  creed,  that  "  the  Father 


590  PRINCIPLES   OF 

is  God,  the  Son  is  God,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  is  God;  and  yet  there 
are  not  three  Gods,  but  one  God." 

But  in  the  systematic  elaboration  of  this  argument  the  theologian 
Abstain  from  slio^l*^^  carefully  abstain  from  unauthorized  assertions, 
unauthorized  A  theme  SO  full  of  mystery  and  of  majesty  as  the  nature 
disputed  read-  of  God,  and  his  personal  revelations  in  Christ  and 
'"^-  through  the  Holy  Spirit,  admits  of  no  dogmatic  tone. 

Assertions  like  the  following  from  Sherlock  are  no  advantage  to 
the  interests  of  truth :  "  To  say  they  are  three  divine  persons,  and 
not  three  distinct  infinite  minds,  is  both  heresy  and  nonsense.  .  .  . 
The  distinction  of  persons  cannot  be  more  truly  and  aptly  repre- 
sented than  by  the  distinction  between  three  men;  for  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost  ai*e  as  really  distinct  persons  as  Peter,  James,  and 
John."  '  This  is  being  wise  above  what  is  written,  and  is  as  harm- 
ful to  valid  argument  as  citinsr  and  ur^inof  texts  where  the  readingr 
and  punctuation  are  doiibtful,  or  where  (as  in  the  case  of  1  John 
V,  1)  the  evidence  of  interpolation  is  overwhelming.  No  man 
should  assume  to  explain  the  mysteries  of  Deity. 

The  doctrine  of  atonement  in  Christ  is  thus  set  forth  in  the 
vicarious  Atone-  Canons  of  the  Synod  of  Dort:  "The  death  of  the  Son 
™^°*-  of  God  is  the  only  and  most  perfect  sacrifice  and  satis- 

faction for  sin;  is  of  infinite  worth  and  value,  abundantly  sufficient 
to  expiate  the  sins  of  the  whole  world."  ^  The  Westminster  Con- 
fession of  Faith  expresses  it  thus:  "The  Lord  Jesus,  by  his  perfect 
obedience  and  sacrifice  of  himself,  which  he  through  the  eternal 
Spirit  once  offered  up  unto  God,  hath  fully  satisfied  the  justice  of 
the  Father,  and  purchased  not  only  reconciliation,  but  an  everlast- 
ing inheritance  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  for  all  those  whom  the 
Father  hath  given  unto  him."  ^  It  is  probable  that  to  many  evan- 
gelical Christians  neither  of  these  forms  of  statement  is  satis- 
factory, while  yet,  at  the  same  time,  they  would  not  reject  them 
as  unscriptural.  They  contain  several  phrases  which  have  been  so 
mixed  with  dogmatic  controversy  that  many  would  for  that  reason 
decline  to  use  them,  and  prefer  the  simple  but  comprehensive  state- 
ment of  the  Gospel :  "  God  so  loved  the  world  that  he  gave  the  Son, 
the  only  begotten,  that  every  one  who  believes  in  him  should  not 

'  Vindication  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  pp.  CG,  105.  London,  1G90.  Equally 
dogmatic,  on  the  other  hand,  is  the  declaration  of  Norton  concerning  the  doctrines 
of  the  Trinity  and  the  twofold  nature  of  Christ :  "  There  is  not  a  passage  to  be  fovind 
in  the  Scriptures  which  can  be  imagined  to  affirm  either  of  those  doctrines  that  have 
been  represented  as  being  at  the  very  foundation  of  Christianity." — Statement  of 
Reasons  for  not  lielieving  the  Doctrines  of  Trinitarians  concerning  the  Nature  of  (ilod 
and  the  Person  of  Christ,  p.  63.     Third  edition,  Boston,  1856. 

"See  Schaff,  Creeds  of  Christendom,  vol.  ill,  p.  586.  '  Ibid.,  p.  6'21. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  591 

perish,  but  have  life  eternal"  (John  iii,  16).  This  Scripture  does 
not  say  that  the  Son  was  given  as  "  a  sacrifice  and  satisfaction  foi* 
sin,"  or  that  the  procedure  was  a  "perfect  obedience  and  sacrifice 
of  himself "  in  order  to  "  fully  satisfy  the  justice  of  the  Father," 
and  "  purchase  reconciliation  for  all  those  whom  the  Father  hath 
given  unto  him."  But,  as  Alford  well  says:  "  These  words,  whether 
spoken  in  Hebrew  or  in  Greek,  seem  to  carry  a  reference  to  the 
offering  of  Isaac;  and  Nicodemus  in  that  case  would  at  once  be 
reminded  by  them  of  the  love  there  required,  the  substitution  there 
made,  and  the  prophecy  there  uttered  to  Abraham  (Gen.  xxii,  18) 
to  which  '  every  one  who  believes '  so  nearly  corresponds." ' 

When  we  proceed  to  compare  with  this  Scripture  its  obvious 
parallels  (as  Rom.  iii,  24-26;  v,  6-10;  Eph.  i,  7;  1  Peter  i,  18,  19; 
iii,  18;  1  John  iv,  9),  and  bring  forward  in  illustration  of  them  the 
Old  Testament  idea  of  sacrifice,  and  the  symbolism  of  blood  (see 
above,  pp.  358,  359),  we  may  construct  a  systematic  exhibition  of 
the  doctrine  of  atonement  which  no  faithful  interpreter  of  the 
Scriptures  can  fairly  gainsay  or  resist.  It  is  not  a  special  dogmatic 
exposition  of  any  single  text,  or  a  peculiar  stress  laid  upon  isolated 
words  or  phrases  by  which  a  scriptural  doctrine  is  best  set  forth, 
but  rather  by  accumulation  of  a  number  and  variety  of  passages 
bearing  on  the  subject,  the  meaning  and  relevancy  of  each  of  which 
are  obvious. 

The  awful  doctrine  of  eternal  punishment  has  been  greatly  con- 
fused by  mixing  with  it  many  notions  which  are  desti-  Eternal  Pun- 
tute  of  valid  scriptural  proof.  The  refinements  of  isbment. 
torture,  delineated  in  the  appalling  pictures  of  Dante's  Inferno, 
should  not  be  taken  as  guides  to  help  us  in  understanding  the  words 
of  Jesus,  even  though  we  be  told  that  the  Gehenna,  "where  their 
worm  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched"  (Mark  ix,  48),  and 
"the  outer  darkness,  where  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of 
teeth  "  (Matt,  xxv,  30),  authorize  such  horrible  portraitures  of  the 
final  doom  of  the  wicked.  The  fearful  representations  of  divine 
judgment  and  penalty  set  forth  in  Scripture  need  not  be  interpreted 
literally  in  order  to  enforce  the  doctrine  of  the  hopeless  perdition 
of  the  incorrigible  sinner,  and  the  exegete,  who  assumes  in  his  dis- 
cussion that  the  literal  import  of  such  texts  must,  be  held,  weakens 
his  own  argument.  Far  more  convincing  and  overwhelming  is 
that  mode  of  teaching  which  makes  no  special  plea  over  the  ety- 
mology or  usage  of  some  disputed  word  (even  though  it  be  aldyviog), 
but  rather  holds  up  to  view  the  unjform  and  awful  indications  of 
hopeless  ruin  and  utter  exclusion  from  the  glory  of  God  which  the 

1  Greek  Testament,  in  loco. 


592  PRINCIPLES   OF 

Scriptures  continually  furnish  as  a  certain  fearful  expectation  of 
the  ungodly.  A  momentous  and  eternal  truth  may  l>e  set  forth  in 
figure  as  well  as  in  literal  statement,  and  the  force  of  the  Scripture 
doctrine  of  the  final  doom  of  the  wicked  lies  not  more  in  the  terri- 
"utter  absence  ble  suggestions  of  positive  punishment,  tribulation,  and 
hope^^forThe  ^"g"is^'>  than  in  the  absence  of  any  hope  of  pardon  and 
wicked.  salvation  in  the  future.     Vain  is  the  appeal  to  such  a 

text  as  Matt,  xii,  32:  "Whosoever  shall  speak  against  the  Holy 
Spirit  it  shall  not  be  forgiven  him,  neither  in  this  age  nor  in  that 
which  is  to  come."  Here,  say  some,  is  an  implication  that  for  other 
sins  and  blasphemies  there  may  be  forgiveness  in  the  age  or  world 
to  come.  But  to  this  it  may  at  once  be  answered  that  such  an  im- 
plication is  at  best  a  most  uncertain  hope,  while  .on  the  contrary  the 
assertion  is  most  positive  that  the  blasphemy  against  the  Spirit 
shall  never  be  forgiven.  Endless  perdition,  therefore,  awaits  such 
blaspheming  sinners,  and  will  the  opponents  of  eternal  punishment 
assume  that  no  one  ever  has  committed,  or  will  commit,  the  blas- 
phemy here  meant?  In  the  parallel  passage  of  Mark  (iii,  29)  we 
meet  with  that  profound  and  fearfully  suggestive  statement,  that 
^'  whosoever  shall  blaspheme  against  the  Holy  Spirit  has  no  forgive- 
ness forever,  but  is  guilty  of  [tvoxog,  is  held  fast  bound  by)  eternal 
sin."  How  futile  and  delusive,  then,  to  build  a  hope  on  the  sugges- 
tions of  such  a  text,  when,  for  aught  the  reasoner  knows,  every  wil- 
ful sinner,  who  deliberately  rejects  the  claims  of  the  Gospel  and  dies 
impenitent,  commits  this  blasphemy  against  the  Spirit. 

Equally  delusive  would  it  be  to  build  a  hope  of  future  pardon  on 
Preaching  to  ^^^^^^  ^^  Written  in  1  Peter  iii,  18-20,  and  iv,  6.  For  if 
the  spirits  iu  we  allow  the  strictest  literal  construction,  and  believe 
prison.  ^j^^^  Christ  went  in  spirit  and  preached  to  the  spirits  in 

prison,  we  have  no  intimation  as  to  what  he  preached,  or  of  the 
results  of  that  preaching;  and  the  entire  statement  is  confined  to 
those  who  were  disobedient  in  the  days  of  Noah.  There  is  no  inti- 
mation that  he  preached  to  any  other  sjnrits,  or  that  any  other  such 
preaching  ever  took  place  before,  or  ever  will  take  place  hereafter. 
Furthermore,  if  we  infer,  from  1  Peter  iv,  G,  that  the  purpose  of 
this  preaching  to  the  dead  was  that  they  might  be  rescued  from 
their  prison,  and  "live  according  to  God  in  spirit,"  it  is  entirely 
uncertain  whetlier  any  one  of  them  accepted  the  offer,  and  were 
thus  saved.  If,  however,  it  be  urged  that  it  is  altogether  presum- 
able that  such  a  preaching  of  the  Gospel  by  Christ  himself  would 
not  be  without  blessed  results,  and  that  such  grace  shown  to  one 
class  of  imprisoned  spirits  is  a  fair  ground  for  }>resuming  that  like 
mercy  may  be  extended  to  many  others,  if  not  to  all,  we  have  only 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  593 

to  answer:  All  these  are  presumptions  which  have  too  mucn  against 
them  in  other  parts  of  Scripture  to  be  made  the  ground  of  hope  to 
any  wilful  sinner,  or  to  allow  our  laying  dowu  any  universal  propo- 
sition touching  the  unknown  future.' 

We  repudiate  the  notion,  often  asserted  by  some,  that  we  may 
not  use  the  figurative  portions  of  Scripture  for  the  pur-  Doctrine  not 
pose  of  establishing  or  maintaining  a  doctrine.  Figures  confined  to  any 
of  speech,  parables,  allegories,  types,  and  symbols  are  portion  of  the 
divinely  chosen  forms  by  which  God  has  communicated  scnptures. 
a  large  part  of  his  written  word  to  men,  and  these  peculiar  methods 
of  communicating  thought  may  teach  doctrine  as  well  as  any  thing 
else  (comp.  pp.  247,  248).  Our  Lord  has  seen  fit  to  set  forth  his 
truth  in  manifold  forms,  and  it  is  our  duty  to  recognise  that  truth 
whether  it  appear  in  metaphor,  parable,  or  symbol.  Is  there  no 
doctrine  taught  in  such  metaphors  as  (Psa.  li,  7)  "  Purify  me  with 
hyssop,"  or  (1  Cor.  v,  7)  "  Christ,  our  passover,  was  sacrificed "  ? 
Can  the  doctrine  of  a  new  creation  in  Christ  (2  Cor.  v,  17;  Gal. 
vi,  15),  and  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (Titus  iii,  5),  be  more 
clearly  or  forcibly  set  forth  than  by  the  figure  of  the  new  birth 
(regeneration)  as  used  by  Jesus  (John  iii,  3-8)  ?  Does  the  allegory 
of  the  vine  and  its  branches  (John  xv,  1-6)  teach  no  doctrine  ? 
Was  there  no  doctrine  taught  by  the  lifting  up  of  the  serpent  in 
the  wilderness,  or  in  the  symbolism  of  blood,  or  in  the  pattern  and 
service  of  the  tabernacle  ?  And  as  to  teaching  by  parables,  we  may 
well  observe  with  Trench:  "To  create  a  powerful  impression  lan- 
guage must  be  recalled,  minted,  and  issued  anew,  cast  into  novel 
forms,  as  was  done  by  him  of  whom  it  is  said  that  without  a  parable 
{■napa[3oX7J,  in  its  widest  sense)  spake  he  nothing  to  his  hearers;  that 
is,  he  gave  no  doctrine  in  the  abstract  form,  no  skeletons  of  truth, 
but  all  clothed,  as  it  were,  with  flesh  and  blood.  He  acted  himself 
as  he  declared  to  his  disciples  they  must  act  if  they  would  be  scribes 
instructed  unto  the  kingdom,  and  able  to  instruct  others  (Matt, 
xiii,  52) ;  he  brought  forth  out  of  his  treasure  things  new  and  old; 
by  the  help  of  the  old  he  made  intelligible  the  new;  by  the  aid  of 
the  familiar  he  introduced  them  to  that  which  was  strange;  from 
the  known  he  passed  more  easily  to  the  unknown.     And  in  his  own 

*  It  scarcely  accords  with  the  true  spirit  of  calm  theological  inquiry  to  obtrude  dog- 
matical assertions  as  to  any  possibilities  of  grace  beyond  this  life.  What  may  be  the 
future  development  and  opportunities  of  those  who  die  in  infancy,  or  what  may  be 
allowed  in  another  state  of  being  to  such  as  may  be  supposed  never  to  have  had  suit- 
able opportunities  of  accepting  salvation  in  this  life,  are  questions  which  God  alone 
<;an  answer,  and  the  presumption  of  those  who,  in  the  absence  of  specific  revelation, 
•dogmatize  on  such  themes,  is  only  equalled  by  the  folly  of  those  who  would  rest  their 
hopes  of  the  future  on  such  unknown  and  uncertain  possibilities. 
38 


594  PRINCIPLES    OP 

manner  of  teaching,  and  in  his  instruction  to  his  apostles,  he  has 

given  us  the  secret  of  all  effectual  teaching — of  all  speaking  which 

shall  leave  behind  it,  as  was  said  of  one  man's  eloquence,  stings  in 

the  minds  and  memories  of  the  hearers."  ' 

But  when  we  come  to  study  the  doctrines  of  biblical  eschatology, 

Eschatoiogy  how  little  do  we  iind  that  is  not  set  forth  in  figure  or  in 

mostly  taught  gymj^ol?  Perhaps  the  notable  confusion  of  modern 
in      figurative      J  -i        _ 

language.  teaching  on  the  subjects  of  the  parousia,  resurrection, 
and  judgment  is  largely  due  to  a  notion  that  these  doctrines  must 
needs  have  been  revealed  in  literal  form.  The  doctrine  of  divine 
judgment  with  its  eternal  issues  is  none  the  less  positive  and  sure 
because  set  forth  in  the  highly  wrought  and  vivid  picture  of 
Matt.  XXV,  31-46,  or  the  vision  of  Rev.  xx,  11,  12.  "The  judg- 
ment seat  of  Christ"  (Rom.  xiv,  10;  2  Cor.  v,  10)  is  a  metaphorical 
expression,  based  on  familiar  forms  of  dispensing  justice  in  human 
tribunals  (comp.  Matt,  xxvii,  19;  Acts  xii,  21;  xviii,  12,  16;  xxv, 
6,  10,  17),  and  the  expositor  who  insists  that  we  must  understand 
the  eternal  judgment  of  Christ  only  as  executed  after  the  forms  of 
human  courts,  only  damages  the  cause  of  truth. 

How,  also,  has  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  become  involved 
The  resurrection  "^  doubt  and  confusion  by  over  wise  attempts  to  tell 
of  the  body.  /iqio  the  dead  are  raised  up,  and  with  tohat  body  they 
come  forth!  That  the  body  is  raised  is  the  manifest  scriptural 
teaching.  Christ's  body  was  raised,  and  his  resurrection  is  the 
type,  representative,  and  pledge  that  all  will  be  raised  (1  Cor. 
XV,  1-22).  Many  saints  who  had  fallen  asleep  arose  with  him,  and 
it  is  expressly  written  that  their  bodies  {aconara)  Avere  raised  (Matt, 
xxvii,  52).  Paul's  doctrine  clearly  is  that  "he  who  raised  up  Christ 
Jesus  from  the  dead,  shall  also  make  alive  your  mortal  bodies" 
(Rom.  viii,  11;  comp.  Phil,  iii,  21).  He  does  not  entertain  the 
question,  on  which  so  many  modern  divines  have  wasted  specula- 
tion, as,  wherein  consists  identity  of  body,  and  may  not  the  dust  of 
different  bodies  become  mixed,  and  will  all  the  particles  of  matter 
be  restored?  But  he  does  employ  suggestive  illustrations,  and  by 
the  figure  of  the  grain  of  wheat  shows  that  the  body  which  is  sown 
is  "not  the  body  that  shall  be"  (1  Cor.  xv,  37).  He  calls  attention 
to  the  varieties  of  flesh  (odp^),  as  of  men,  beasts,  birds,  and  fishes, 
and  to  the  great  difference  between  the  glory  of  heavenly  and 
earthly  bodies,  and  then  says  that  the  human  body  is  sown  in  cor- 
ruption, dishonour,  and  weakness,  but  raised  up  in  incorruption, 
glory,  and  power  (verses  39-45).  "It  is  sown  a  natural  (^vxikov) 
body;  it  is  raised  a  spiritual  body."     The  interests  of  divine  truth 

'  Notes  on  the  Parables,  p.  2Y. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  595 

have  not  been  helped  by  dogmatic  essays  to  go  beyond  the  apostle 
in  the  explanation  or  illustration  of  this  mystery. 

In  the  systematic  presentation,  therefore,  of  any  scriptural  doc- 
trine, we  are  always  to  make  a  discriminating  use  of  Freedom  from 
sound  hermeneutical  principles.  We  must  not  study  anTpTesulup- 
them  in  the  light  of  modern  systems  of  divinity,  but  tions. 
should  aim  rather  to  place  ourselves  in  the  position  of  the  sacred 
writers,  and  study  to  obtain  the  impression  their  words  would  natu- 
rally have  made  upon  the  minds  of  the  first  readers,'  The  question 
should  be,  not  what  does  the  Church  say,  or  what  do  the  ancient 
fathers  and  the  great  councils  and  the  oecumenical  creeds  say,  but 
what  dc  the  Scriptures  legitimately  teach?  Still  less  should  we 
allow  ourselves  to  be  influenced  by  any  presumptions  of  what  the 
Scriptures  ought  to  teach.  It  is  not  uncommon  for  writers  and 
preachers  to  open  a  discussion  with  the  remark  that  in  a  written 
revelation  like  the  Bible  we  might  naturally  expect  to  find  such  or 
such  things.  All  such  presumptions  are  uncalled  for  and  prejudi- 
cial. The  assumption  that  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  desci-ibes  a 
universal  cosmogony,  and  that  the  Book  of  Revelation  details  all 
human  history,  or  that  of  the  Church,  to  the  end  of  time,  has  been 
the  fruitful  source  of  a  vast  amount  of  false  exegesis. 

The  teacher  of  Scripture  doctrine  should  not  cite  his  proof -texts 
ad  lihitum,  or  at  random,  as  if  any  word  or  sentiment  ^^^^^  ^^^  ^^  ^^ 
in  hai-mony  with  his  purpose,  if  only  found  in  the  Scrip-  cited  ad  Ubi- 
tures,  must  needs  be  pertinent.  The  character  of  the 
whole  book  or  epistle,  and  the  context,  scope,  and  plan  are  often 
necessary  to  be  taken  into  consideration  before  the  real  bearings 
of  a  given  text  can  be  clearly  apprehended.  That  doctrine  only 
is  theologically  sound  which  rests  upon  a  strict  graramatico-his- 
torical  interpretation  of  Scripture,  and  while  all  divinely  inspired 
Scripture  is  pi-ofitable  for  doctrine  and  discipline  in  righteousness, 
its  inspiration  does  not  require  or  allow  us  to  interpret  it  on  any 

'  In  order  to  be  able  to  explain  any  one's  words  to  others,  one  must  understand 
them  himself,  otherwise  he  cannot  render  them  intelligible  to  others.  One  under- 
stands another's  words  when  by  means  of  them  he  thinks  as  did  the  speaker  or  writer, 
and  as  he  wished  one  should  think.  Thus  one  explains  another's  words  rightly  to 
others  when  he  enables  them  to  think  precisely  what  the  speaker  or  writer  thought 
or  wished  to  be  thought.  In  the  interpretation  of  any  writing,  it  has  not  to  be  in- 
quired what  the  readers  for  whom  it  was  destined  thought,  but  what,  according  to  the 
intention  of  the  writer,  they  should  have  thought  in  reading  it.  The  object  of  the  in- 
terpretation is  the  thoughts  of  the  writer  or  speaker,  in  as  far  as  he  has  expressed 
them  in  words  for  others.  This  does  not  take  away  that  it  often  is  of  great  import- 
ance to  the  interpretation  of  one  or  more  sayings  to  inquire  how  the  hearers  under- 
stood them. — Doedes,  Manual  of  Hermeneutics,  pp.  2,  3.     Edinb.,  1867. 


596  PRINCIPLES   OF 

other  principles  than  those  which  are  applicable  to  uninspired 
writings.  The  interpi'eter  is  always  bound  to  consider  how  the 
subject  lay  in  the  mind  of  the  author,  and  to  point  out  the  exact 
ideas  and  sentiments  intended.  It  is  not  for  him  to  shoM^  how 
many  meanings  the  words  may  possibly  bear,  nor  even  how  the 
first  readers  understood  them.  The  real  meaning  intended  by  the 
author,  and  that  only,  is  to  be  set  forth. 

There  is  much  reason  for  believing  that  the  habit,  quite  general 
New  Testament  ^in^e  the  time  of  Ernesti,  of  treating  the  hernieneutics 
doctrine   not  of  the  New  Testament  separately  from  the  Old,  has  oc- 

clear      without  .  -,   ^^  .  t.t  /•  •  .  t 

the  help  of  the  casioned  the  misunderstanding  or  some  important  doc- 
o'''-  trines  of  Holy  Writ.    The  language  and  style  in  M'hich 

certain  New  Testament  teachings  are  expressed  are  so  manifestly 
modelled  after  Old  Testament  forms  of  statement,  that  they  cannot 
be  properly  explained  without  a  minute  and  thorough  apprehension 
of  the  import  of  the  older  Scriptures."  We  cannot,  therefore,  ac- 
cept without  qualification  the  following  words  of  Van  Oosterzee : 
"  We  have  no  right  for  a  use  of  these  (O.  T.)  Scriptures,  in  which 
we  do  not  take  heed  to  their  peculiar  character,  as  distinguished 
from  those  of  the  New  Testament.  The  Old  Testament  revelation 
must  always  be  regarded  first  in  relation  to  Israel,  and  has  only 
value  for  our  dogmatics  in  so  far  as  it  is  confirmed  by  the  gospel 
of  the  New.  The  letter  of  the  Old  Testament  must  thus  be  tested 
by  the  sj^irit  of  the  New,  and  whatever  therein  stands  in  opposition 

'  Take  for  illustration  the  following  passage  from  one  of  our  most  recent  and  able 
works  on  theology.  Speaking  of  the  lawless  one  mentioned  in  2  Thess.  ii,  8,  Pope 
says :  "  Prophetical  theology  has  its  many  hypotheses  for  the  explanation  of  the  sym- 
bols of  Daniel  and  the  Apocalypse,  and  the  plain  words  of  St.  Paul.  But  there  has 
not  yet  been  found  on  earth  the  power  or  the  being  to  whom  all  St.  Paul's  terms  are 
applicable."— Compendium  of  Chr.  Theology,  vol.  iii,  p.  394.  The  critical  student  of 
Daniel's  description  of  the  little  horn  (Dan.  vii,  8,  25;  viii,  9-12,  23-25;  conip.  xi, 
36-38),  will  note  that  the  words  of  Paul  in  2  Thess.  ii,  3-10,  are  no  plainer  than  those 
of  Daniel,  from  whom  they  are  so  evidently  copied.  And  if  Daniel's  sjTubols  and  lan- 
guage were  fulfilled,  as  most  of  the  leading  Old  Testament  excgetes  admit,  in  the  law- 
less Antiochus  Epiphanes,  how  can  it  be  said,  in  view  of  the  equally  lawless  and  blas- 
phemous Nero,  that  "  there  has  not  yet  been  found  on  earth  the  power  or  the  being 
to  whom  all  St.  Paul's  terms  are  applicable?"  We  might  fill  volumes  with  extracts 
showing  how  excgetes  and  writers  on  New  Testament  doctrine  assmne  as  a  principle 
not  to  be  (luestioned  that  such  highly  wrought  language  as  Matt,  xxiv,  29-31;  1  Thess. 
iv,  l(j ;  and  2  Pet.  iii,  10,  12,  taken  almost  verbatim  from  Old  Testament  prophecies  of 
Judgment  on  nations  and  kingdoms  which  long  ago  perished,  must  be  literally  under- 
stood. Too  little  study  of  Old  Testament  ideas  of  judgment,  and  apocalyptic  language 
and  style,  would  seem  to  be  the  main  reason  for  this  one  sided  exegesis.  It  will  re- 
quire more  than  assertion  to  convince  thoughtful  men  that  tlie  figurative  language  of 
Isaiah  and  Daniel,  admitted  on  all  hands  to  bo  such  iu  those  ancient  prophets,  is  to  be 
literally  interpreted  when  used  by  Jesus  or  Paul. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  597 

to  the  New  has  as  little  binding  force  for  our  belief  as  for  our  life. 
A  dogma  which  can  be  supported  only  by  an  appeal  to  the  Old 
Testament  can  only  maintain  its  place  in  Christian  dogmatics  if  it 
manifestly  does  not  conflict  with  the  letter  and  spirit  of  the  New, 
and  also  stands  in  close  connexion  with  other  propositions  derived 
from  the  New  Testament." ' 

Every  distinct  portion  of  Scripture,  whether  in  the  Old  or  the 
New  Testament,  must,  indeed,  be  interpreted  in  har-  one  and  the 
mony  with  its  own  peculiar  character,  and  the  historical  ^^^^^  Tes\^ 
standpoint  of  each  writer  must  be  duly  considered,  ments. 
The  Old  Testament  cannot  be  truly  apprehended  without  always 
regarding  its  relation  to  Israel,  to  whom  it  was  first  intrusted 
(Rom.  iii,  2).  And  while  it  is  true  that  "the  letter  of  the  Old 
Testament  must  be  tested  by  the  spirit  of  the  New,"  it  is  equally 
true  that,  to  understand  the  spirit  and  import  of  the  New  Testament, 
we  are  often  dependent  on  both  the  letter  and  spirit  of  the  Old.  It 
may  be  that  no  important  doctrine  of  the  Old  Testament  is  Avithout 
confirmation  in  the  Christian  Scriptures,  but  it  is  also  to  be  remem- 
bered that  every  important  doctrine  of  the  New  Testament  may  be 
found  in  germ  in  the  Old,  and  the  New  Testament  writers  were  all, 
without  exception,  Jews  or  Jewish  proselytes,  and  made  use  of  the 
Jewish  Scriptures  as  oracles  of  God. 

A  correct  view  of  this  whole  subject  is  taken  when  we  regard 
the  Hebrew  people  as  of  old  divinely  chosen  to  hold  Confusion  of 
and  teach  the  principles  of  true  religion.  It  was  not  ™*inoTes^of 
theirs  to  develop  science,  philosophy,  and  art.  Other  thought. 
races  attended  more  to  these.  It  was  not  until  the  mystery  of  God, 
enclosed  in  the  Israelitish  worship  as  the  bud,  blossomed  out  in  the 
Gospel,  and  was  given  to  the  Aryan  world,  that  a  systematic  theol- 
ogy began  to  be  developed.  These  Gentile  peoples  had  long  been 
trying,  by  reason  and  from  nature,  to  solve  the  mysterious  problems 
of  the  universe,  and  when  the  Gospel  revelation  came  to  them,  it 
was  eagerly  seized  by  many  as  a  clue  to  the  intricate  and  perplex- 
ing secrets  of  God  and  the  world.  But  a  failure  to  apprehend  the 
letter  and  spirit  of  the  Hebrew  records  of  faith  led  also  to  a  failure 
to  understand  some  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  so  that,  from  the 
apostolic  age  until  now,  there  has  been  a  conflict  of  Gnostic  and 
Ebionitish  tendencies  in  Christian  thought.  It  is  only  as  a  correct 
scientific  method  enables  us  to  distinguish  between  the  true  and  the 
false  in  each  of  these  tendencies  that  we  shall  perceive  that  the 
revelations  of  both  Testaments  are  essentially  one  and  inseparable. 
There  can  be,  therefore,  no  complete  and  thorough  hermeneutics  of 

1  Christian  Dogmatics,  vol.  i,  p.  18.     New  York,  1874. 


598  PRINCIPLES   OF 

New  Testament  doctrine  without  a  clear  insight  into  the  letter  and 

spirit  of  the  Old. 

In  the  practical  and  homiletical  use  of  the  Scriptures  we  are  also 

to  seek  first  the  true  grammatico-historical   sense.      The   life  of 

godliness  is  nourished  by  the  edifying,  comforting,  and  assuring  les- 

„  .  ,  _,  sons  of  divine  revelation.  They  serve  also,  as  we  have 
Practical    and  .       •'  .  f 

Homiletical  use  seen,  for  reproof  and  correction.  But  in  this  more  sub- 
of  Scripture.  jective  and  practical  use  of  the  Bible,  words  and  thoughts 
may  have  a  wider  and  more  general  application  than  in  strict 
exegesis.  Commands  and  counsels  which  had  their  first  and  only 
direct  reference  to  those  of  bygone  generations  may  be  equally 
useful  for  us.  An  entire  chapter,  like  that  of  Rom.  xvi,  filled  with 
personal  salutations  for  godly  men  and  women  now  utterly  un- 
known, may  furnish  many  most  precious  suggestions  of  brotherly 
love  and  holy  Christian  fellowship.  The  personal  experiences  of 
Abraham,  Moses,  Dayid,  Daniel,  and  Paul  exhibit  lights  and  shades 
from  which  every  devout  reader  may  gather  counsel  and  admoni- 
tion. Pious  feeling  may  find  in  such  characters  and  experiences 
lessons  of  permanent  worth  even  where  a  sound  exegesis  must  dis- 
allow the  typical  character  of  the  person  or  event.  In  short,  every 
great  event,  every  notable  personage  or  character,  whether  good  or 
evil,  every  account  of  patient  suffering,  every  triumph  of  virtue, 
every  example  of  faith  and  good  works,  may  serve  in  some  way  for 
instruction  in  righteousness.' 

Tile  promises  of  divine  oversight  and  care,  the  hopes  and  pledges 
Promises  ad-  ^^^  before  the  holy  men  of  old,  and  all  exhortations  to 
monitions,  and  watchfulness  and  prayer,  may  have  manifold  practical 
waiumg!,.  applications  to  Christians  of  every  age.     The  same  may 

be  said  of  all  the  ancient  warnings  and  appeals  to  escape  the  com- 
ing wrath  of  God  which  had  primary  reference  to  impending  judg- 
ments. The  carelessness  and  disobedience  of  those  who  lived  in 
the  days  of  Noah  are  a  lively  admonition  and  warning  to  all  men  of 

'  The  Bible  constantly  presents  general  principles,  absolute  commandments,  and 
living  examples,  but  it  never  applies  these  principles  to  human  actions  as  recorded 
upon  its  pages.  This  is  left  to  the  enlightened  conscience  and  thoughtful  judg- 
ment of  tiie  reader.  It  is  God's  will  that  we  should  meditate  upon  all  .Scripture,  and 
make  ourselves  the  moral  application.  Tiie  Bible  records  the  pious  Hjcdience  and 
simple  and  singular  faith  of  Noah,  but  makes  no  comment  upon  it;  and  it  relates  the 
story  of  his  shame  when  overcome  by  his  appetite  without  a  note  of  wa'-ning.  Abra- 
ham is  sometimes  called  the  friend  of  (iod,  and  is  styled  in  Scripture  the  father  of 
them  tliat  believe.  His  marvellous  simplicity  of  character,  and  unfaltering  trust  in 
God,  are  fully  described  in  the  sacred  word,  and  without  note  of  conin-cnt  or  excuse 
tin-  stories  of  iiis  deceit  arc  also  written  out. — Pierce,  The  Word  of  GocJ  Opened,  p.  77. 
New  York,  1868. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS.  599 

every  age  who  follow  worldly  things  alone,  and  have  no  care  about 
their  eternal  destiny.  All  the  New  Testament  admonitions  to 
watch  and  be  in  constant  readiness  for  the  coming  of  the  Lord  are 
capable  of  a  most  legitimate  practical  application  to  believers  now,  in 
reference  to  the  uncertainty  of  the  hour  of  death.  To  say,  as  many 
modern  Chiliasts,  that  such  an  application  of  the  admonitions  to 
prepare  for  the  parousia  is  a  perversion  of  the  Scripture  teaching, 
is  most  futile.  The  coming  of  the  Lord  to  a  believer  at  death,  in 
order  to  transport  his  redeemed  spirit  to  paradise,  is  not,  to  be 
sure,  the  parousia  which  Jesus  declared  would  take  place  within  a 
generation  from  his  time.  But  as  departure  from  this  life  puts  an 
end  to  probation,  and  "  inasmuch  as  it  is  appointed  unto  men  once 
to  die,  and  after  that — judgment"  (Heb.  ix,  27),  every  motive 
which  should  have  led  men  to  prepare  and  watch  for  the  judgment 
of  the  flood,  and  every  exhortation  for  the  contemporaries  of  Jesus 
and  Paul  to  watch  and  be  ready  for  the  parousia,  serve  ever  to  ad- 
monish and  warn  us  and  all  generations  to  be  prepared  for  that  day 
and  hour  when  we  must  pass  to  eternal  judgment  of  weal  or  woe. 
How  much  more  sensible  and  forcible  is  this  practical  exhortation, 
the  point  and  propriety  of  which  all  men  must  feel,  than  the  vision- 
ary appeals  of  those  expositors  who  would  have  us  believe  that  we 
are  now,  any  day  and  hour,  to  expect  what  Jesus  said  should  take 
place  within  his  own  generation ! 

Pre-millennialists  and  post-millennialists  have  fallen  into  notice- 
able confusion  in  attempts  to  make  such  commands  as  "  Watch 
therefore,  for  ye  know  not  on  what  day  your  Lord  cometh ; " 
*'  Therefore,  be  ye  also  ready ; "  "  Watch  therefore,  for  ye  know 
not  the  day  nor  the  hour"  (Matt,  xxiv,  42,  44;  xxv,  13),  consistent 
with  two  thousand  years'  delay.  Brown,  indeed,  concedes  (Christ's 
Second  Coming,  p.  20)  that  "  the  death  of  any  individual  is,  to  all 
practical  purposes,  the  coming  of  Christ  to  that  soul.  It  is  his 
summons  to  appear  before  the  judgment  seat  of  Christ.  It  is  to 
him  the  close  of  time,  and  the  opening  of  an  unchanging  eternity, 
as  truly  as  the  second  advent  will  be  to  mankind  at  large."  "  There 
is  a  perfect  analogy,"  he  adds,  "  between  the  two  classes  of  events. 
.  .  .  Still,  it  is  in  the  way  of  analogy  alone  that  texts  expressive  of 
the  one  can  or  ought  to  be  applied  to  the  other.  It  can  never  be 
warranted,  and  is  often  dangerous  to  make  that  the  primary  and 
proper  interpretation  of  a  passage  which  is  but  a  secondary,  though 
it  may  be  a  very  legitimate,  and  even  irresistible,  application  of  it." 
All  this  is  very  correct,  but  Mr.  Brown  falls  into  the  error  of  the 
Chiiiasts  themselves  when  he  goes  on  to  argue  that  all  the  New 
Testament  admonitions  and  warnings  which  imply  the  nearness  of 


600  PRINCIPLES. 

the  parousia  are  consistent  with  centuries,  and  even  millenniums,  of 
delay.  All  those  warnings  and  exhoi'tations  had,  as  we  have  shown 
above,  immediate  and  primary  application  and  reference  to  the  end 
of  the  pre-millennial  age  (aeon),  which  took  place  at  the  fall  of  the 
temple  and  its  cultus,  and  correct  interpretation  finds  their  primary 
and  only  direct  reference  to  that  event.  But  by  way  of  manifest 
analogy,  and  in  practical  and  homiletical  use,  they  have  a  pertinent 
and  impressive  lesson  to  all  generations  of  men.  And  it  detracts 
from  the  force  and  usefulness  of  these  texts  to  import  into  them  an 
imaginary  significance  which  they  were  never  intended  to  bear. 

In  all  our  private  study  of  the  Scriptures  for  personal  edificatiorv 
,  we  do  well  to  remember  that  the  first  and  fjreat  thint' 
honiiieticai  use  is  to  lay  hold  of  the  real  spirit  and  meaning  of  the 
be^'ased'^'^on  ^^acred  Avriter.  There  can  be  no  true  application,  and 
correct  inter-  no  profitable  taking  to  ourselves  of  any  lessons  of  the 
Bible,  unless  we  first  clearly  apprehend  their  original 
meaning  and  reference.  To  build  a  moral  lesson  upon  an  erroneous 
interpretation  of  the  language  of  God's  word  is  a  reprehensible  pro- 
cedure. But  he  who  clearlj-  discerns  the  exact  grammatico-historical 
sense  of  a  passage,  is  the  better  qualified  to  give  it  any  legitimate 
application  which  its  language  and  context  will  allow. 

Accordingly,  in  homiletical  discourse,  the  public  teacher  is  bound 
to  base  his  applications  of  the  truths  and  lessons  of  the  divine  word 
upon  a  correct  apprehension  of  the  primary  signification  of  the  lan- 
guage which  he  assumes  to  expound  and  enforce.  To  misinterpret 
the  sacred  writer  is  to  discredit  any  a})plication  one  may  make  of 
his  words.  But  when,  on  the  other  hand,  the  preacher  first  shows, 
by  a  valid  interpretation,  that  he  thoroughly  comprehends  that 
which  is  written,  his  various  allowable  accommodations  of  the 
writer's  words  will  have  the  greater  force,  in  whatever  practical 
applications  he  may  give  them. 


PART  THIED. 


HISTORY  OF  BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION. 


JText  to  tTie  Soly  Scriptures,  which  are  themselves  a  history  and  depository 
of  divine  revelation,  there  is  no  stronger  proof  of  the  continual  presence  of 
Christ  with  his  people,  no  more  thorough  vindication  of  Christianity,  no  richer 
source  of  spiritual  wisdom  and  experience,  no  deeper  incentive  to  virtue  and 
piety,  than  the  Sistory  of  Christ's  Tcingdom.  Every  age  has  a  message  from, 
(rod  to  man,  which  it  is  the  greatest  importance  for  man  to  understand.  (The 
Epistle  to  the  Seirews  descrihes,  in  stirring  elog[uence,  the  cloud  of  witnesses  from 
the  Old  dispensation  for  the  encouragement  of  Christians.  \N  hy  should  not  the 
greater  cloud  of  apostles,  evangelists,  martyrs,  confessors,  fathers,  reformers,  and 
saints  of  every  age  and  tongue,  sijice  the  coming  of  Christ,  he  held  up  for  th& 
same  purpose  ? — Schaff. 


HISTORY 


OP 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION. 


CHAPTER  I. 

ANCIENT    JEWISH    EXEGESIS. 

« 

A  KNOWLEDGE  of  the  histoiy  of  biblical  interpretation  is  of  ines- 
timable value  to  the  student  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  value  and  im- 
It  serves  to  guard  against  errors  and  exhibits  the  torT'oTTnter- 
aetivity  and  eflbrts  of  the  human  mind  in  its  search  pretatiou. 
after  truth  and  in  relation  to  noblest  themes.  It  shows  what  influ- 
ences have  led  to  the  misunderstanding  of  God's  word,  and  how 
acute  minds,  carried  away  by  a  misconception  of  the  nature  of  the 
Bible,  have  sought  mystic  and  manifold  meanings  in  its  contents. 
From  the  first,  the  Scriptures,  like  other  writings,  were  liable  to  be 
understood  in  different  ways.  The  Old  Testament  prophets  com- 
plained of  the  slowness  of  the  people  to  apprehend  spiritual  things 
(Isa.  vi,  10;  Jer.  v,  21  ;  Ezek.  xii,  2).  The  apostolical  epistles  were 
not  always  clear  to  those  who  first  received  them  (comp.  2  Thess. 
ii,  2;  2  Pet.  iii,  16).  When  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  assumed 
canonical  form  and  authority,  and  became  the  subject  of  devout 
study  and  a  means  of  spiritual  discipline,  they  furnished  a  most  in- 
viting field  for  literary  research  and  theological  controversy.  On 
the  one  hand,  there  were  those  who  made  light  of  what   .,  .  .     ^ , 

'  _  "  Ongfin  and  va- 

the  prophets  had  written,  attacked  the  sacred  books,  riety  of  inter- 
and  perverted  their  meaning ;  on  the  other,  there  arose  ^^^  "  ^""^' 
apologists  and  defenders  of  the  holy  volume,  and  among  them  not 
a  few  who  searched  for  hidden  treasures,  and  manifold  meanings  in 
every  word.  Besides  assailants  and  apologists  there  were  also 
many  who,  withdrawing  from  the  field  of  controversy,  searched 
the  Scriptures  on  account  of  their  religious  value,  and  found  in 
them  wholesome  food  for  the  soul.  The  ]>ublic  teachers  of  relig- 
ion, in  oral  and  written  discourses,  expounded  and  applied  the 
oracles  of  God  to  the  peoj^le.  Hence,  in  the  course  of  ages,  a  great 
variety  of  expositions  and  a  vast  amount  of  biblical  literature  have 


604  HISTORY   OF 

appeared.  The  student  who  acquaints  himself  with  tlie  various 
methods  of  exposition,  and  with  the  works  of  the  great  exegetes  of 
ancient  and  modern  times,  is  often  saved  thereby  from  following 
new  developments  of  error,  and  is  guarded  against  the  novelties  of 
a  restless  fancy.  He  observes  how  learned  men,  yielding  to  subtle 
speculation  and  fanciful  analogies,  have  become  the  founders  of 
schools  and  systems  of  interpretation.  At  the  same  time  be  be- 
comes more  fully  qualified  to  maintain  and  defend  the  faith  once 
delivered  to  the  saints. 

It  was  the  distinguishing  advantage  of  the  Jewish  people  that 
they  were  entrusted  with  the  oracles  of  God  (Rom.  iii,  1,  2).  But 
during  the  long  period  between  Moses  and  the  Babylonian  exile 
they  showed  little  appreciation  of  their  heavenly  treasure.  The 
law  was  ignored,  the  prophets  were  persecuted,  the  people  turned 
to  idolatry,  and  the  penalty  of  exile  and  dispersion,  forean.nounced 
by  Jehovah  himself  (Deut.  xxviii,  63,  64),  followed  at  last  with 
terrible  severity.     In  the  land  of  exile,  a  descendant  of  Aaron  the 

high  priest,  hopeless  of  Israel's  rise  by  worldly  iirow- 
Ezra  the  scribe         cj      i  ^        i  j  ./    i    ^ 

ess,  set  his  heart  upon  the  devout  study  of  the  ancient 

Scriptures.  "Ezra  prepared  his  heart  to  seek  the  law  of  Jehovah 
and  to  do  it,  and  to  teach  in  Israel  statutes  and  judgments"  (Ezra 
vii,  10).  Possibly  the  one  hundredth  and  nineteenth  psalm  was  the 
result  of  that  study,  and  shows  the  impression  the  law  made  upon 
that  studioiis  priest  while  yet  a  young  man.  A  profound  apprecia- 
tion of  God's  law,  such  as  this  psalm  evinces,  would  prompt  a  man 
like  Ezra  to  seek  the  reformation  of  Israel  by  calling  them  to  a 
rigid  obedience  of  the  commandments.  We  may,  accordingly,  date 
the  beginning  of  formal  exposition  of  the  Scriptures  at  the  time  of 
Ezra.  A  need  was  then  felt,  as  not  before,  of  appealing  to  the 
oracles  of  God.  The  Book  of  the  Law  was  recognized  as  funda- 
mental in  the  records  of  divine  revelation.  The  noblest  Israelite 
was  he  who  delighted  in  Jehovah's  law,  and  meditated  therein 
by  night  and  by  day  (Psa.  i,  2  ;  comp.  Psa.  cxix,  .'54,  .35,  97).  The 
loss  of  temple,  throne,  palace,  and  regal  splendour  turned  the  heart 
of  the  devout  Jew  to  a  more  diligent  inquiry  after  the  words  of 
Jehovah, 

Ezra,  accordingly,  led  a  company  of  exiles  back  to  Jerusalem  and 
instituted  numerous  reforms.  The  coinmandments  forbidding  in- 
PiiWii;  fnstruc-  tcmiarriage  with  the  heathen  were  I'igidly  enfoi'ccd,  and 
tion  in  the  law.  t]ie  legal  feasts  and  fasts  were  observed.  The  public 
instruction  of  the  jjcople,  as  recorded  in  Neh.  viii,  1-8,  was  a  meas- 
ure designed  to  make  known  the  will  of  Jehovah,  and  to  develop  a 
purer  religions  sentiment  among  the  people.    Thenceforth  the  office 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  605 

and  work  of  the  scribe  became  important.  He  was  no  longer  the 
mere  recorder  of  passing  events,  the  secretary,  clerk,  or  Tugogiceand 
registrar  of  the  king  (2  Sam.  viii,  17;  1  Kings  iv,  3),  work  of  the 
but  the  copyist  and  authorized  expounder  of  the  sacred 
books.  Their  devotion  to  the  study  and  interpretation  of  the  law 
brought  to  the  scribes  after  a  time  the  title  of  lawyers  {vofunoL). 
At  an  early  period  they  became  known  as  a  distinct  class,  and  were 
spoken  of  as  families  or  guilds  (1  Chron.  ii,  55).  Ezra  is  to  be  re- 
garded as  a  distinguished  representative  of  his  class.  lie  was  not 
the  only  scribe  who  returned  from  Babylon  (Ezra  viii,  IG).  On  the 
occasion  of  the  public  reading  of  the  law  he  had  the  assistance  of 
learned  Levites,  who  were  able  to  explain  the  ancient  Scriptures  to 
the  people.  Constant  searching  of  these  l.oly  writings  led  to  the 
various  reforms  narrated  in  the  Books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

The  great  convocations  described  in  Neh.  viii,  1-15,  were  the 
first  sessions  of  what  is  known  in  Jewish  tradition  as  The  Great  syn- 
the  Great  Synagogue.  The  acts  of  the  Jewish  leaders  agogue. 
of  that  time  were  without  doubt  greatly  embellished  in  the  later 
traditions,  but  nothing  is  more  probable  than  that  these  eminent  re- 
formers arranged  the  order  of  the  sacred  books  of  their  nation,  and 
provided  for  their  systematic  reading  and  exposition.  Many  mo- 
tives would  have  naturally  prompted  to  this.  The  troubles  with 
the  Samaritans,  the  tendencies  to  mingle  with  the  heathen,  the 
neglect  to  provide  for  the  service  of  the  house  of  God,  all  required 
that  thorouiih  measures  should  be  taken  to  imbue  the  Israelites 
with  the  ancient  theocratic  spirit.  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  were  too 
wise  and  discerning  not  to  perceive  that  a  devout  study  of  the  law 
and  the  prophets  would  be  a  tnighty  educational  means  of  securing 
for  their  people  the  surest  safeguard  against  the  evils  to  which  they 
were  constantly  exposed.  With  the  knowledge  of  the  condition 
and  circumstances  of  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem  which  the  Books  of 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah  fui-nish,  we  can  scarcely  conceive  tliat  such 
farsighted  men  as  these  great  leaders  and  their  coadjutors — priests, 
Levites,  and  scribes  (Neh.  xiii,  13),  men  of  knowledge  and  discern- 
ment (Neh.  X,  28) — would  have  failed  to  do  substantially  all  those 
things  which  the  unanimous  voice  of  tradition  ascribes  to  the  men 
of  the  Great  Synagogue.  They  reformed  abuses,  provided  for  llie 
temple  service,  and  for  the  public  reading  and  exposition  of  the 
law,  and  these  measures  imply  a  collection  of  tl\e  canonical  Scrip- 
tures as  the  authoritative  basis  of  the  entire  procedure.' 

'  The  attempts  of  some  scholars  (Alting,  Rau,  Kuenen)  to  set  aside  the  traditions 
of  the  Great  Synagogue  as  worthless  rabbinical  fables  are  scarcely  of  a  cliaracter  to 
commend  themselves  to  a  candid  critic.     Fables  and  foolish  legends  are  probably 


606  HISTORY    OF 

The  progress  of  Jewish  exegesis  from  the  time  of  Ezra  to  the 
,   beerinniiiir  of  the  Christian  era  may  be  dimly  traced  in 

Progress    of         '^  °         .  f  .  . 

Jewish  exegesis  scattered  notices  of  the  learned  Jews  of  that  period, 
after  Ezra.  -^^  ^j^^  pre-Christian  apocryphal  and  pseudei)igraphal 

literature,  in  the  works  of  Philo  Judoeus  and  Josephus,  and  in  the 
Talmud.  The  rigid  measures  adopted  by  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  their 
associates  would  seem  to  have  prepared  the  way  for  Pharisaism. 
The  scribes  of  the  period  succeeding  that  of  Nehemiah  not  only 
copied  the  sacred  books,  and  explained  their  general  import,  but 
took  measures  to  make  a  hedge  about  the  law.  They  set  a  value 
on  the  very  letters  of  the  law,  and  counted  their  number.'  They 
scrupulously  guarded  against  interpolations  and  changes,  but,  at 
the  same  time,  they  gathered  up  traditions  and  constructed  an  oral 
law  which  in  time  came  to  have  with  them  an  authority  equal  to 
that  of  the  sacred  books.  Thus  orig^inated  the  Jewish  Halachah 
Halachah  and  ^^^^  Hagadah,  the  legal  and  homiletic  exegesis.  "The 
Hagadah.  Bible,"  says  Stanley,  "  and  the  reading  of  the  Bible  as 

an  instrument  of  instruction,  may  be  said  to  have  been  begu«  on 
the  sunrise  of  that  day  when  Ezra  unrolled  the  parchment  scroll  of 
the  law.  It  was  a  new  thought  that  the  divine  will  could  be  com- 
municated by  a  dead  literature  as  well  as  by  a  living  voice.  In  the 
impassioned  welcome  with  which  this  thought  was  received  lay  the 
germs  of  all  the  good  and  evil  which  were  afterward  to  be  developed 
out  of  it;  on  the  one  side,  the  possibility  of  appeal  in  each  succes- 
sive age  to  the  primitive,  undying  document  that  should  rectify  the 
fluctuations  of  false  tradition  and  fleeting  opinion ;  on  the  other 
hand,  the  temptation  to  pay  to  the  letters  of  the  sacred  book  a 
worship  as  idolatrous  and  as  profoundly  opposed  to  its  spirit  as 
once  had  been  the  veneration  paid  to  the  sacred  trees  or  the  sacred 
stones  of  the  consecrated  groves  or  hills."  * 

associated  with  the  tradition,  as  they  are  with  most  of  the  great  persons  and  events  of 
Jewish  history ;  but  to  reject  the  entire  tradition  as  unworthy  of  belief  is  going  quite 
too  far.  It  is  too  well  supported  by  the  necessary  implication  of  Ezra's  and  Nehe- 
miah's  acts  to  be  thus  summarily  rejected.  It  would  be  very  uncritical  and  arbitrary 
to  reject  the  statement  of  2  Maccabees  ii,  i;5,  viz.,  that  Nehemiah  founded  a  library, 
and  collected  the  acts  of  kings  and  prophets,  because  the  writer  elsewhere  records 
numerous  idle  legends.  In  chap,  i,  18,  the  same  writer  ascribes  to  Nehemiah  what 
was  done  by  Zerubbabel  and  Joshua  (comp.  Ezra  iii-vi),  but  shall  we  thence  argue 
that  no  such  work  was  done  at  all  ? 

'  See  Giusburg,  article  Scribes,  in  Kitto's  ("yclopicdia  of  Biblical  Literature. 

*  Lectures  on  Hist,  of  Jewish  Church,  Third  Series,  pp.  158,  159.  The  same  writer 
further  on  observes:  "There  is  one  tradition;il  saying,  ascribed  to  the  Great  Syna- 
gogue, which  must  surely  have  come  down  from  an  early  stage  in  the  hijtory  of  the 
scribes,  and  which  well  illustrates  the  disease  to  which.  a,s  to  a  parasitical  plant,  the 
order  itsi^lf,  and  all  the  branches  into  which  it  has  grown,  has  been  subject.      It 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  GOT 

This  superstitious  reverence  for  the  letter  of  the  law,  and  the 
disposition  of  the  scribes  to  fence  it  around  with  au-  Pharisees  and 
thoritative  oral  precepts,  most  naturally  led  to  the  later  sadducees. 
Pharisaism.  But  the  excessive  claims  of  these  ancient  scribes  pro- 
duced a  reaction,  and  gave  rise  to.  the  sect  of  the  Sadducees,  who 
refused  to  be  bound  by  the  traditions  of  the  elders.  "  The  Phari- 
sees," says  Josephus,  "  have  delivered  to  the  people  a  great  many 
observances  by  succession  from  their  fathers  which  are  not  written 
in  the  law  of  Moses,  and  for  that  reason  it  is  that  the  Sadducees 
reject  them,  and  say  that  we  are  to  esteem  those  observances  to  be 
obligatory  which  are  in  the  written  word,  but  are  not  to  observe 
what  are  derived 'from  the  tradition  of  our  forefathers;  and  con- 
cerning these  things  it  is  that  great  disputes  and  differences  have 
arisen  among  them,  while  the  Sadducees  are  able  to  persuade  none 
but  the  rich,  and  have  not  the  poj^ulace  obsequious  to  them;  but 
the  Pharisees  have  the  multitude  on  their  side." ' 

The  manifold  precepts  and  rules,  expositions  and  traditions,  Avhich 

are  commonly  known  as  the  Halachah  and  the  Haga-   ^^  ,,.^     ^. 

•^  .     .  -.        .  ~    The  Midrashim. 

dah,  had  their  origin  in  these  Pharisaic  tendencies  of 

the  scribes  who  succeeded  Ezra  and  his  coadjutors.  These  various 
expositions  constitute  the  Midrashim,  or  most  ancient  Jewish  com- 
mentary. The  Halachic,  or  legal  exegesis,  was  confined  to  the 
Pentateuch,  and  aimed,  by  analogy  and  combination  of  specific 
written  laws,  to  deduce  precepts  and  rules  on  subjects  which  had 
not  been  formally  treated  in  the  Mosaic  Code.  This  was,  in  the 
main,  a  reading  into  the  laws  of  Moses  a  great  variety  of  things 
which  they  could  not,  by  any  fair  interpretation,  be  made  to  teach. 
The  Hagadic  exegesis,  on  the  other  hand,  was  extended  over  the 
entire  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  and  was  of  a  more  practical  and 
homiletical  character.  It  aimed,  by  means  of  memorable  sayings 
of  illustrious  men,  parables,  allegories,  marvellous  legends,  witty 
proverbs,  and  mystic  interpretations  of  Scripture  events,  to  stimu- 
late the  Jewish  people  to  pious  activity  and  obedience.  The  Mid- 
rashim thus  became  a  vast  treasury  of  Hebrew  national  lore.     It 

resembles  in  form  the  famous  mediaeval  motto  for  the  guidance  of  conventual  ambi- 
tion, although  it  is  more  serious  in  spirit:  'Be  circumspect  in  judging— make  many 
disciples— make  a  hedge  round  the  law.'  Nothing  could  be  less  like  the  impetuosity, 
the  simplicity,  or  the  openness  of  Ezra  than  any  of  these  three  precepts.  But  the  one 
which  in  each  succeeding  generation  predominated  more  and  more  was  the  last: 
'Make  a  hedge  about  the  law.'  To  build  up  elaborate  explanations,  thorny  obstruc- 
tions, subtle  evasions,  enormous  developments,  was  the  labour  of  the  later  Jewish 
scribes,  till  the  Pentateuch  was  buried  beneath  the  Mishna,  and  the  Mishua  beneath 
the  Gemara." — Jewish  Church,  Third  Series,  pp.  165,  166. 

1  Antiquities,  book  xiii,  chap,  x,  6.     Comp.  Wars,  book  ii,  chap.  viii. 


€08  HISTORY   OF 

was  developed  gradually,  by  public  lectures  and  homilies,  and  be- 
came more  and  more  comprehensive  and  complicated  as  new  le- 
gends, secret  meanings,  hidden  wisdom,  and  allegorical  expositions 
were  added  by  one  great  teacher  after  another.  We  have  the  sub- 
stance of  the  Midrashim  preserved  in  the  Talmud  and  the  Hagadic 
literature  of  the  first  three  centuries  of  the  Christian  era.' 

The  character  of  these  ancient  JcAvish  expositions  of  Scripture 
Hagadic  her-  may  be  inferred  from  the  kind  of  hermeneutical  princi- 
meneutics.  pigg  which  were  adopted.  Among  the  thirty-two  rules 
of  interpretation  collected  and  arranged  by  Elieser  Ben-Jose  the 
following  are  specimens: 

By  the  superfluous  use  of  the  three  particles,  ns,  D3,  and  P|N,  the  Scrip- 
tures indicate  in  a  threefold  manner  that  something  more  is  included  in 
the  text  than  the  apparent  declaration  would  seem  to  imply.  Tliis  rule  is 
illustrated  by  Gen.  xxi,  1,  where  it  is  said  "Jehovah  visited  Sarah" 
(mc'-ns),  and  the  particle  DN  is  supposed  to  show  that  the  Lord  also  vis- 
ited other  women  besides  Sarah. 

A  subject  often  explains  itself  while  it  imparts  information  on  other  sub- 
jects. Thus,  in  Jer.  xlvi,  22,  ''Its  cry  shall  go  like  the  ser2:)ent,"  is  a  state- 
ment whicli  serves,  besides  describing  the  loud  cry  of  Egypt,  to  indicate 
that  the  serpent  set  up  a  great  cry  wiien  the  Lord  pronounced  his  curse 
against  it. 

A  great  and  incomprehensible  thing  is  represented  by  something  small,  to 
render  it  intelligible.  Thus,  in  Deur.  xxxii,  2,  "  My  doctrine  shall  drop  as 
the  rain,"  the  great  and  incomprehensil)le  doctrines  of  revelation  are  made 
comprehensible  by  comparison  with  the  rain. 

Explanations  are  obtained  by  reducing  the  letters  of  a  word  to  their 
numerical  value,  and  substituting  for  it  another  word  or  phrase  of  the 
same  value,  or  by  transposing  the  letters.  Thus,  for  example,  the  sum  of 
the  letters  in  the  name  of  Eliezer  ("lTyv^J),  Abraham's  servant,  is  equivalent 
to  three  hundred  and  eighteen  (3'18),  the  number  of  his  trained  men  (Gen. 
xiv,  14),  and,  accordingly,  shows  that  Eliezer  alone  was  worth  a  host  of 
servants.'^ 

*  Ishmael  Ben-Elisa's  Commentary  on  Exodus  xii-xxiii,  oalleci  Mechilta  (XJl^DD).  is 
an  allegorical  treatment  of  various  Mosaic  ceremonies,  and  is  one  of  the  oldest  speci- 
mens of  formal  Jewish  exposition.  Ishmael  Ben-Elisa  flourished  about  the  close  of 
the  first  and  the  beginning  of  the  second  century  of  our  era,  and  was  the  author  of 
several  mystic  treatises  which  are  still  extant.  His  Mechilta  with  a  Latin  translation 
is  given  by  Ugoliuo  in  the  Thesaurus  Antiquitatum  Sacrarum,  vol.  xiv,  Venice,  1752. 
A  German  translation  of  numerous  ancient  Midrashim  is  given  by  Wiinsche,  Biblio- 
tlieca  Rabl)inica ;  cine  Samnilung  alter  Midrashim  zum  erstcn  Male  ins  Deutsche 
ulK-rtragcn,  Lpz.,  1880-1881,  12  thin  vols.,  8vo. 

■•^  See  all  these  Halachic  and  Hagadic  rules  of  interpretation  stated  and  illustrated 
by  Oinsburg,  in  the  article.  Midrasli,  in  Kitto's  Cvclopn?dia  of  Biblical  Litoraturo,  and 
also  in  JI'( -lintock  and  Strong's  Cyclopa;dia  of  Biblical,  Theological,  and  Ecclesiastical 
Literature. 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION".  609 

It  is  easy  to  see  liow  such  hermeneutical  principles  must  neces- 
sarily involve  the  exposition  of  the  Scriptures  in  utter  Mischief  and 
confusion.  The  study  of  the  ancient  Jewish  exegesis  a'^ag^dic*  exe- 
is,  therefore,  of  little  practical  value  to  one  who  seeks  gesis. 
the  true  meaninsf  of  the  oracles  of  God.'  But  for  evidences  of  an- 
cient  Jewish  opinions,  and  for  the  criticism  of  the  Hebrew  text, 
the  comments  of  the  older  rabbis  may  sometimes  be  of  great  ser- 
vice. "  When  it  is  borne  in  mind,"  says  Ginsburg,  "  that  the  anno- 
tators  and  punctuators  of  the  Hebrew  text,  and  the  translators  of 
the  ancient  versions,  were  Jews  impregnated  with  the  theological 
of)inions  of  the  nation,  and  who  prosecuted  their  biblical  labours  in 
harmony  with  these  opinions  and  the  above-named  exegetical  rules, 
the  importance  of  the  Halachic  and  Hagadic  exegesis  to  the  criti- 
cism of  the  Hebrew  text,  and  to  a  right  understanding  of  the 
Greek,  Chaldee,  Syriac,  and  other  versions,  as  well  as  of  the  quota- 
tions of  the  Old  Testament  in  the  New  Testament,  can  hardly  be 
overrated.  If  it  be  true — and  few  will  question  the  fact — that 
every  successive  English  version,  either  preceding  or  following  the 
Reformation,  reflects  the  peculiar  notions  about  theology.  Church 
government,  and  politics  of  each  period  and  every  dominant  party; 
and  that  even  the  most  literal  translation  of  modern  days  is,  in  a 
certain  sense,  a  commentary  of  the  translator;  we  ought  to  regard 
it  as  natural  that  the  Jews,  without  intending  to  deceive,  or  wil- 
fully to  alter  the  text,  should,  by  the  process  of  the  Midrash,  intro- 
duce or  indicate,  in  their  biblical  labours,  the  various  opinions  to 
which  shifting  circumstances  give  rise."  "^ 

How  far  this  Hagadic  method  of  interpretation  became  current, 
or  to  what  extent  it  was  generally  adopted  by  the  great  The  septuagint 
body  of  Jews  in  the  world  before  the  Christian  era,  it  Hagi^c^'prin- 
is  impossible  to  tell.  That  it  became  quite  general  is  cipies. 
evident.  The  plain  meaning  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  it  would  im- 
press itself  upon  the  unsophisticated  reader,  was  probably  every- 
where allowed.  Only  the  anthropomorphisms  and  more  difficult 
passages  would  at  first  be  set  aside  as  not  to  be  understood  liter- 
ally.   The  Septuagint  version  is  a  monumental  witness  to  the  manner 

1  Surely  no  exposition  of  Scripture,  however  deep  its  reverence  for  tl:e  letter  of 
•God's  word,  could  be  safe  or  useful  which  proceeded  on  the  principles  of  Rabbi  Akiba, 
who  maintained  that  every  repetition,  figure,  parallelism,  synonyme,  word,  letter,  par- 
ticle, pleonasm,  nay,  the  very  shape  of  a  letter,  had  a  recondite  meaning,  just  as 
every  fibre  of  a  fly's  wing  or  an  ant's  foot  has  its  peculiar  significance.  See  Ginsburg, 
Coheletli,  translated,  with  a  Commentary,  pp.  495,  496,  Lond.,  1861.  For  much  valu- 
able information  on  Hagadic  exegesis,  see  the  whole  of  i.ppendix  I,  and  also  the 
learned  Introduction  to  this  Commentary. 

2  Ginsburg,  in  Kitto's  Cyclopiedia,  article  Midrash. 

39 


610  HISTORY   OF 

in  which  the  Jews  of  that  aoje  freely  admitted  fictitious  lesrends 
and  entire  apocryphal  books  among  their  holy  writings.  This  was 
'  a  very  natural  outgrowth  of  Hagadic  principles,  and  while  the  He- 
brew text  was  honoured  with  a  superstitious  reverence,  its  transla- 
tion into  a  Gentile  tongue  so  far  removed  it  from  its  original  glory 
that  no  scruple  Avas  felt  in  lengthening  its  chronology  to  a  more 
apparent  harmony  with  Egyptian  notions,  and  incorporating  with  it 
books  like  that  of  the  Son  of  Sirach  and  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon, 
which  seemed  like  a  connecting  link  with  Greek  philosophy.'  In 
like  manner  the  whole  body  of  apocryphal  and  pseudepigraphal 
literature  of  a  pre-Christian  date  serves  to  illustrate  the  uncritical 
looseness  of  Hagadic  principles.  For  while  these  ancient  books  fur- 
nish no  examples  of  formal  exegesis,  they  clearly  indicate  the  free- 
dom with  which  many  of  the  more  learned  Jews  of  those  days 
added  philosophy,  fiction,  and  highly  coloured  legend  to  their  ac- 
ceptance of  the  genuine  ancient  Scriptures. 

Aristobulus,  the  priest,  who  is  mentioned  in  2  Mace,  i,  10,  ap- 
pears to  have  been  the  author  of  a  commentary  on  the 
Aristobulus,  the    ^  .  i         <•  i  •  ^     u 

priest  and  schoi-  Books  of  Moses.    Eusebms  speaks  of  him  as     that  most 

^^-  distinguished  scholar  who  was  one  of  the  Seventy  who 

translated  the  Holy  Scriptures  from  the  Hebrew  for  Ptolemy 
Philadelphus  and  his  father,  and  dedicated  his  exposition  of  the 
law  of  Moses  to  the  same  kings."  ^  Fragments  of  this  work  have 
been  preserved  in  Eusebius.^  But  all  formal  attempts,  among  the 
Alexandrian  Jews,  to  expound  the  Scriptures  seem  to  have  sought 
especially  after   hidden  and  mysterious  lore.       "The    allegorical 

'  "  The  Wisdom  of  the  Son  of  Sirach,"  says  Stanley,  "  was  followed,  at  how  long  an 
interval  we  know  not,  by  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon.  As  the  former  book  was  the  ex- 
pression of  a  sage  at  Jerusalem,  with  a  tincture  of  Alexandrian  learning,  so  the  latter 
book  was  the  expression  of  an  Alexandrian  sage  presenting  his  Grecian  ideas  under 
the  forms  of  Jewish  history.  We  feel  with  him  the  oppressive  atmosphere  of  the 
elaborate  Egyptian  idolatry  (chap,  xiii,  2-19;  xv,  17-19).  We  see  through  his  eyes 
the  ships  passing  along  the  Mediterranean  waters  into  the  Alexandrian  harl)our  (xiv, 
1-6).  We  trace  the  footprint  of  Aristotle  in  the  enumeration,  word  by  word,  of  tiie 
four  great  ethical  virtues  (viii,  1).  We  recognise  the  rhetoric  of  the  Grecian  sophists 
in  the  Ptolemscan  court  (v,  9-12;  xi,  17,  18);  we  arc  present  at  the  luxurious  ban- 
quets and  lax  discussions  of  the  neighbouring  philosophers  of  Gyrene  (ii,  1-7).  But 
in  the  midst  of  this  Gentile  scenery  there  is  a  voice  which  speaks  with  the  authority 
of  the  ancient  prophets  to  this  new  world.  The  book  is  a  signal  instance  of  the  cus- 
tom prevalent  in  the  two  centuries  before  the  Gliristian  era,  both  in  tlie  Jewish  and 
the  Gentile  world,  of  jilacing  modern  untried  writings  under  the  shelter  of  some  ven- 
erable authority."— History  of  Jewish  Church,  Third  Series,  pp.  «04,  305. 

'Ecclesiastical  Hi.story,  book  vii,  chap,  xxxii. 

^Prtrparatio  Evangelica,  vii,  14;  viii,  10;  xiii,  1'2.     The  gciuiineness  of  tlle.^c  li.i- 
ments  of  Aristobulus  Jias  been  disputed,  but  is  now  quite  generally  conceded. 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION.  611 

explanation,"  says  Gf orer,  "  conld  come  into  existence  only  among 
a  people  possessed  of  sacred  books,  and  only  at  a  time  when  the 
spokesmen  and  leaders  of  that  nation  had  already  chosen  for  their 
possession  another  philosophy  than  that  presented  by  the  literal 
meaning  of  the  written  revelation."  ' 

In  the  writings  of  Philo,  the  philosophical  Jew  of  Alexandria, 
we  may  trace  the  development  of  the   Halachic  and   „^.,     ,  , 

•'  .  ^  Philo  Judseus, 

Hagadic  hermeneutical  principles  as  they  became  more  tue  Aiexan- 
fully  shaped  and  coloured  by  Hellenic  culture.^  Juda-  ^^^' 
ism  and  Hellenism,  so  to  speak,  came  into  closest  contact  in  this 
celebrated  metropolis  of  Egypt,  and  in  their  spiritual  and  intellec- 
tual mingling  produced  what  came  to  be  known  as  Neo-Platonisra. 
Kingsley  maintains  that  Philo  Judseus  was  the  real  father  and 
founder  of  this  eclectic  philosophy.^  The  historical  importance  of 
his  writings,  as  a  conspicuous  fountain-head  of  allegorical  exegesis, 
justifies  a  fuller  notice  than  their  intrinsic  merits  deserve.  He  was 
born  about  twenty-five  years  before  Christ,  and  was  contemporary 
with  the  principal  events  of  the  New  Testament  history.  He  was 
not  improbably  an  associate  or  intimate  acquaintance  of  Apollos  of 
Alexandria,  the  eloquent  Jew  who  was  mighty  in  the  Scriptures 
(Acts  xviii,  24).  He  united  a  deep  reverence  for  the  Mosaic  reve- 
lation with  an  absorbing  fondness  for  the  speculations  of  Greek 
philosophy,  and  thus  became,  from  the  force  of  circumstances,  an 
eclectic  philosopher. 

Philo  appears,  at  times,  to  assume  or  allow  the  literal  sense  of  a 
passage,  but  his  great  aim  is  to  exhibit  the  mystic  j^^jj^j^^  ^^  j^^ 
depths  of  significance  which  lie  concealed  beneath  the  tic  depths  of 
sacred  words.  He  would  not  have  it  supposed  that  ''"^  ^'^'^' 
the  divine  revelation  is  of  easy  apprehension  by  the  common  mind, 
for  stich  a  supposition  would  have  seemed  to  him  like  a  disparage- 
ment of  its  hidden  labyrinths  of  divine  knowledge,  to  explore  which 
requires  a  kind  of  supernatural  vision.  The  Hellenic  philosophy, 
with  which  he  was  so  fascinated,  was  assumed  to  be  a  natural  and 
necessary  part  of  the  laws  of  Moses.  He  seems  to  entertain  no 
conception  of  the  historical  standpoint  of  his  author,  and  to  have 
no  realistic  or  historical  sense  of  the  truthfulness  or  accuracy  of  the 
statements  of  Moses.  He  seizes  upon  chance  expressions  and  inci- 
dental analogies  as  matters  of  great  moment,  and  lugs  in  farfetched 
notions  that  are  utterly  foreign  to  the  plain  meaning  of  the  text. 

'  Philo  und  die  alexandrinische  Theosophie,  vol.  i,  p.  69. 

^  See  Hitter,  Philo  uiul  die  Halacha.     Eine  vergleicheiide  Studie  unter  steter  Be- 
riichsichtigung  des  .Josephus,  Lpz.,  1879. 

'Alexandria  and  Her  Schools,  p.  79,  Cambridge,  1854. 


612  HISTORY   OF 

He  shows  not  the  least  regard  for  the  connexion  and  scope  of  a 
passage,  or  for  the  integrity  of  Scripture  as  a  trustworthy  record  of 
facts;  nevertheless  he  treats  the  law  itself  as  the  divinely  inspired 
word  of  God. 

His  principal  works  consist  of  a  series  of  expository  treatises  on 
The  works  of  the  books  of  the  Mosaic  law.  He  makes  occasional 
Phiio.  references  to  other  parts  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  also 

to  a  large  number  of  Greek  writers,  especially  the  poets  and  philos- 
ophers. His  philosophical  theories,  theological  opinions,  and  espe- 
cially his  doctrine  of  the  Logos,  have  been  the  subject  of  a  vast 
amount  of  study  and  disputation.  It  is  still  a  question  whether  the 
Logos  of  Philo  is  to  be  understood  as  a  person,  or  a  personification 
of  the  divine  reason,  or  merely  a  divine  attribute.  But  in  a  writer 
so  eclectic  and  so  full  of  mysticism  it  is  quite  probable  that  these 
several  notions  are  much  confused,  and  that  no  definite  answer  can 
be  given.  The  creation  by  the  Avord  of  God,  as  suggested  in  the 
expression,  and  God  said,  so  often  repeated  in  the  first  chapter  of 
Genesis,  was  the  first  indication  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Logos.  An- 
other element  was  added  to  it  by  the  language  used  concerning  the 
angel  of  Jehovah  (Exod.  xxiii,  20-22).  Tlie  doctrine  of  the  divine 
wisdom,  as  set  forth  in  Job  xxviii,  12-28,  and  Pro  v.  viii  and  ix, 
presented  it  in  still  another  form.  The  personification  of  Avisdom 
is  still  more  emphatic  in  the  apocryphal  books  of  tlie  Son  of  Sirach 
(Ecclesiasticus,  chaps,  i  and  xxiv)  and  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon 
(vii,  22-29).  The  peculiar  use  of  the  terms,  N";i3^,  X-Jp-O  (Word), 
and  nr3^  (Shechinah),  instead  of,  or  in  addition  to,  the  name  of 
God  in  the  Targums,  seems  to  belong  to  the  same  development  of 
thought.  Is  it  strange,  then,  that  with  an  allegorist  and  mystic 
like  Philo  all  the  various  and  vague  conjectures  that  had  long 
floated  about  these  words  should  have  been  api)ropriated,  to  some 
extent,  and  blended  further  with  Platonic  ideas  ? 

The  following  specimens  will  serve  to  illustrate  Philo's  general 
style  and  method  of  interpreting  the  Scriptures.  Speaking  of  Par- 
adise, and  the  trees  of  life  and  of  knowledge,  he  observes: 

Tlu'se  stiitements  ii])pear  to  nie  to  l)e  dictated  1)y  a  philosopliv  wliioli  is 
syinlioiical  rather  tliaii  strictly  accurate.  For  no  trees  of  life  or  of  kiiowi- 
edye  have  ever  at  any  previous  time  ajjpeareil  upon  the  earth,  nor  is  it 
likely  tluit  any  will  appear  hereafter.  l>ui  I  ratlier  conceive  lliat  Muses 
was  speaking  in  an  allegorical  spirit,  intending'  hy  liis  Paradise  to  intimate 
tlie  dominant  cliaracter  of  the  soul,  wliicli  is  lull  ol'  innumerahle  opinions, 
as  tliis  figurative  Paradise  was  of  trees.  And  l)y  the  iree  of  life  lie  was 
shadowing  out  the  greatest  of  the  virtues — namely,  piety  toward  tin.'  gods, 
by  means  of  which  the  soul  is  made  immortal — ami  liy  tlie  tree  whicli  liad 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  613 

the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil  lie  was  intimating  that  wisdom  and  mod- 
eration by  menns  of  which  things  contrary  in  their  nature  to  one  another 
are  distinguished.' 

In  Gen.  ii,  6,  where  the  Hebrew  reads,  "A  mist  (IX)  went  up 
froiu  the  land  and  watered  the  whole  face  of  the  ground,"  Philo 
adopts  the  Septiiagint  version,  which  is,  "  A  fountain  went  up  from 
the  land  and  watered  all  the  face  of  the  land,"  and  comments  thus: 

He  here  calls  the  mind  the  fountain  of  the  earth,  and  the  sensations  he 
calls  the  face  of  the  earth,  because  there  is  the  most  suitable  place  in  the 
whole  body  for  them  with  reference  to  their  appropriate  energies,  a  place 
that  nature,  which  foreknows  everything,  has  assigned  to  them.  And  the 
mind  waters  the  sensations  like  a  fountain,  sending  appropriate  streams 
over  each.'^ 

He  thus  comments  on  the  planting  of  Paradise  at  the  east  in 
Eden  (Gen.  ii,  8) : 

Virtue  is  called  a  Paradise  metaphorically,  and  the  appropriate  place  for 
the  Paradise  is  Eden;  and  this  means  luxury;  and  the  most  appropriate 
field  for  virtue  is  peace  and  ease  and  joy,  in  which  real  luxury  especially 
consists.  Moreover,  the  plantation  of  this  Paradise  is  represented  in  the 
east;  for  right  reascm  never  sets  and  is  never  extinguished,  but  it  is  its 
nature  to  be  always  rising.  And,  as  I  imagine,  the  rising  sun  fills  the  dark- 
ness of  the  air  with  light,  so  also  does  virtue  when  it  has  arisen  in  the  soul 
irradiate  its  mist,  and  dissipate  the  dense  darkness.  "And  there,"  says 
Moses,  "he  placed  the  man  whom  he  had  formed;"  for  God  l)eing  good, 
and  having  formed  our  race  for  virtue,  as  his  work  which  was  most  akin 
to  himself,  places  the  mind  in  virtue,  evidently  in  order  that  it,  like  a  good 
husband,  may  cultivate  and  attend  to  nothing  else  except  virtue.^ 

Pages  might  be  filled  with  examples  of  exegesis  like  these  from 
any  of  the  treatises  of  Philo.  The  excess  of  mystic  and  The  allegorical 
allegorical  fancies  which  this  distincjuished  writer  crowds  ^^^   Hapadic 

,.  ..  .  ,  T  method   per- 

mto  his  expositions  is,  no  doubt,  due  to  a  great  extent  vadedaiuuda- 
to  the  peculiar  Alexandrian  culture  and  the  spirit  of  ^^°^" 
eclectic  philosophy  in  the  midst  of  which  he  was  trained.  A  simi- 
lar spirit  prevailed  at  that  time  among  all  the  Jews  of  the  disper- 
sion, and  the  great  feasts  which  brought  them  to  Jerusalem  "from 
every  nation  under  heaven"  (Acts  ii,  5)  tended  to  cultivate  and 
strengthen  it.  Hellenists  and  Hebrews  were  terms  full  of  signifi- 
cance (comp.  Acts  vi,  1).     The  Jews  of  Palestine  would  naturally 

'  Treatise  on  the  Creation  of  the  World,  sec.  liv.  Yonge's  Translation  (Bohn's 
Ecclesiastical  Library),  vol.  i,  p.  46. 

-  Tieatise  On  the  Allegories  of  the  Sacred  Laws,  book  i,  sec.  xi.  Yonge's  Trans- 
lation, vol.  i,  p.  59. 

^  Ibid.,  book  i.,  sec.  xiv.     Yonge's  Translation,  vol.  i,  pp.  63,  64. 


614  HISTORY    OF 

maintain  their  national  and  religious  peculiarities  with  greater  zeal 
and  firmness  than  the  foreign-horn,  Greek-s])eaking  Jews  on  whom 
tlie  Hehraic  culture  and  customs  would  have  an  inferior  hold. 
Nevertheless,  the  tendency  to  allegorize  the  Scriptures,  and  to 
hedge  them  in  and  load  them  down  with  legend,  proverb,  and  par- 
able, was  common  wherever  Judaism  had  planted  a  synagogue 
and  maintained  a  rabbi.  Philo  was  not  the  author  of  his  system  of 
interpretation,  nor  did  it  end  with  him.  We  trace  it  in  the  most 
ancient  Ilagadic  literature;  it  was  condemned  by  Christ  and  by 
Paul  (Matt.  XV,  1-10;  xxiii,  16-24;  Mark  vii,  5-13;  Col.  ii,  8; 
1  Tim.  i,  4;  vi,  20;  Titus  i,  14),  but  it  prevailed  in  the  rival  rabbin- 
ical schools  of  Hillel  and  Shammai.  The  oldest  collection  of  Hala- 
cliic  interpretations  is  said  to  have  been  made  by  the  school  of 
Hillel,  and  the  Talmud  preserves  to  us  in  written  form  many  an 
illustration  of  the  absurdly  trifling  points  of  difference  on  which 
those  ancient  masters  disputed. 

The  best  ancient  Jewish  exegesis  is  represented  in  the  Targums 
of  Onkelos  and  Jonathan  Ben  Uzziel.  These  are  the 
Chaldee  paraphrases  of  the  Pentateuch  and  the  Proph- 
ets. The  Targum  of  Onkelos  on  the  Pentateuch  is  of  great  value 
as  a  translation.  It  is  in  the  main  a  tolerably  faithful  rendering  of 
the  Hebrew,  and  its  occasional  explanatory  additions  are  usually 
worthy  of  attention  and  regard.  Its  deviations  from  the  Hebrew 
consist  for  the  most  part  in  changes  of  words  and  constructions  for 
the  purpose  of  elucidating  difficulties,  explaining  figurative  terras, 
avoiding  forms  of  expression  which  might  savour  of  heathenism  or 
be  offensive  to  the  philosophical  mind.  He  avoids  anthropomor- 
phisms, and  renders  Eloliim  and  Jehovah  by  the  Word  (xn^'tD)  of 
God,  the  Splendour  (xip"')  of  God,  or  the  Shechinah  of  God.  The 
greatest  liberty  is  taken  with  the  poetical  passages,  where,  in  some 
instances,  it  is  impossible  to  recognise  the  original.  This  Targum 
is  believed  to  belong  to  the  first  century  of  the  Christian  era. 

The  Targum  of  Jonathan  Ben  Uzziel  on  the  Prophets  is  much 
Jonathan  Ben  inorc  free  in  its  paraplirasing  the  Hebrew  text.  On 
uzzki.  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings  it  is  generally  sim- 

ple, and  fairly  gives  the  sense,  but  on  the  prophetical  books  it  often 
runs  into  Hagadic  additions  which  have  no  foundation  in  the  Scrip- 
ture text.  It  is  interwoven- with  Jewish  dogmatical  opinions  and 
current  traditions  of  the  time. 

Still  more  free  in  its  interpretations  is  the  Targum  of  the 
other  Tar-  Pseudo- Jonathan  on  the  Pentateuch.  It  is  a  mixture  of 
guuis.  loose  paraphrase  and  Halachic  and  Ilagadic  legenas,  and 

is  evidently  of  mucji  later  origin  than  the  Talmud.     Tiie  so-called 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  615 

Jerusalem  Targum  on  portions  of  the  Pentateuch  is  of  substantially 
the  same  character  as  that  of  Pseudo-Jonathan,  and  has  been 
thought  by  some  to  be  only  a  fragmentary  recension  of  it.  The 
Targums  on  the  Hagiographa  are  of  various  dates  and  worth,  that 
on  the  Proverbs  adhering  more  closely  to  the  original  text  than  any 
of  the  others.' 

The  Talmud  in  its  present  form  is  a  collection  of  the  comments, 
opinions,  and  discussions  of  generations  of  Jewish 
teachers.  It  is  divided  into  two  parts,  the  Mishna  and 
the  Geraara,  and  embodies  the  substance  of  the  Halachic  and  Ha- 
gadic  comments  and  traditions  which  Avere  current  at  the  time  of 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  for  hundreds  of  years  thereafter." 
According  to  Jewish  tradition  Moses  received  at  Sinai,  in  addition 
to  the  Pentateuch,  an  unwritten  oral  law,  and  afterward  delivered 
it  over  to  Joshua.  Joshua  delivered  the  same  to  the  elders,  and 
they  to  the  prophets,  from  whom  it  came  into  the  possession  of  the 
men  of  the  Great  Synagogue,  the  last  of  whom  was  Simon  the 
Just,  who  was  contemporary  with  Alexander  the  Great  (B.  C.  325). 
Simon  transmitted  it  to  Antigonus  of  Soco,  and  so  it  was  passed 
onward  until  it  came  into  possession  of  the  schools  of  Hillel  and 
.Shammai,  All  this  is  recorded  in  the  Talmudic  treatise  on  the 
Fathers  (rii3N  ''p~3,  Pirke  Ahotli).  These  schools,  especially  that 
of  Hillel,  sifted  and  preserved  these  laws,  until  Rabbi  Judah  the 
Holy  (about  A.  D.  200)  compiled  and  codified  them  in  six  Sedarim 
(Dnnp,  orders,  or  arrangements),  thenceforth  known  as  the  Mishna. 
*'  Rabbi  Judah's  great  desire,"  says  Polano,  "  was  to  poiano  oa  the 
create  among  the  people  a  love  for  the  study  of  the  Mishna. 
law,  and  a  familiarity  with  its  beauties  and  its  moral  and  religious 
•code.  He  saw  that  a  complete  knowledge  of  the  law  was  limited  to 
a  comparatively  few,  who  were  dispersed  through  many  countries, 
and  he  feared  it  might  in  time  be  entirely  forgotten  if  the  interest 
in  its  study  was  allowed  to  decrease  as  it  had  for  some  time  been 
diminishing.  With  the  aid  of  the  sages  and  pupils  of  his  college 
he  set  diligently  to  work,  and  collecting  the  rules,  explanations, 
and  traditions  extant  since  the  death  of  Moses,  he  inscribed  them 
into  six  volumes,  which  he  called  the  Mishna,  or  Second  LaAV.  One 
hundred  and  fifty  years  after  the  destruction  of  the  second  temple 
the  redaction  was  completed.     Many  of   the  laws  were   already 

« 

'  On  the  Targums,  see  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  Kitto's  Cyclopedia  of  Bibli- 
cal Literature,  and  McClintock  and  Strong's  Cyclopaedia  of  Biblical,  Theological,  and 
Ecclesiastical  Literature,  article  Targum. 

*  For  a  popular  account  of  the  Talmud,  see  Emanuel  Deutsch,  in  the  Quarterly  Re- 
view (Lend.)  of  Oct.,  1867,  and  republished  among  his  Literary  Remains,  N.  Y.,  1874. 


616  HISTORY  OF 

obsolete,  even  on  iheir  first  publication.  Rome  had  long  before 
substituted  her  own  penal  code  for  that  belonging  to  tlie  Jewish 
nationality;  the  minute  injunctions  regulating  the  sacrifices  and 
the  temple  services  had  but  an  ideal  value,  and  many  of  the  other 
laws  applied  particularly  to  Palestine,  where  but  comparatively  few 
of  the  people  remained.  Yet  the  whole  was  received  in  Palestine 
and  Babylonia,  not  merely  as  a  record  of  the  past,  but  as  a  holy 
work,  an  infallible  textbook,  a  record  of  laws  that,  with  the  res- 
toration of  the  commonwealth,  would  come  into  practice  as  in 
time  past.  All  Israel  gave  thanks  for  the  completion  of  this  great 
undertaking."  ^ 

The  Mishna,  however,,  did  not  include  all  the  Midrashim  which 
The  formation  ^"^^re  Current  at  the  time  of  its  compilation.  Nor  was 
of  the  Gemara.  the  text  of  the  Mishna  sufficient  to  furnish  law  and 
counsel  for  every  question  of  Jewish  casuistry.  Doubts  and  differ- 
ences of  opinion  led  to  new  discussions,  and  these  later  comments 
and  opinions,  chiefly  those  of  great  teachers  at  Tiberias,  in  Pales- 
tine, and  at  Sora,  in  Babylonia,  grew  into  a  vast  commentary  on 
the  Mishna.  These  later  doctors  of  the  law  are  known  as  the 
Amoraim  (or  Gemaraira,  from  1D3,  to  complete — suppleraenters  or 
finishers  of  the  law),  and  the  collection  of  their  comments  on  the 
Mishna,  accordingly,  acquired  the  name  of  the  Gemara.*  The 
Amoraim  of  Tiberias  completed  their  work  about  A.  D.  350,  and, 
together  with  the  Mishna,  this  collection  is  known  as  the  Pales- 
tinian or  Jerusalem  Talmud.^     The  Babylonian  Talmud  was  not 

'  Selections  from  the  Talmud ;  being  Specimens  of  the  Contents  of  that  Ancient 
Book,  etc.  Translated  from  the  Original,  p.  24.  Philadelpliia,  ISYG.  For  a  conve- 
nient English  translation  of  selections  from  all  the  Sedarim  of  the  Talmud,  see  Barclay, 
The  Talmud.  London,  1878.  The  best  edition  of  the  entire  Mi.shna  is  that  of  Suren- 
husius,  with  a  Latin  translation.    Amsterdam,  1668-1703.    6  vols.,  fol. 

"^  The  rabbis  of  the  period,  A.  D.  180  to  A.  D.  500,  are  commonly  called  the  Tal- 
mudists.  They  are  divided  into  two  classes,  the  Tanaira,  who  compiled  tiie  Mishna, 
and  the  Amoraim,  who  formed  the  Gemara.  These  Talmudists  were  preceded  by  the 
more  ancient  scribes,  known  as  the  Sopherim,  and  followed  by  the  Saboraim,  or 
teachers  of  the  Law,  after  the  completion  of  the  Talmud  (from  A.  D.  500  to  A.  D.  657), 
and  later  by  the  Gaonim,  who  flourished  at  Babylon  from  A.  D.  657  to  A.  D.  1038. 
See  Ginsburg,  article  Scribes,  in  Kitto's  Cyclopiedia  of  Biblical  Literature,  and  M'Clin 
tock  and  Strong's  Cyclopajdia  of  Biblical,  Tlieological,  and  Ecclesiastical  Literature. 
See  also  Bacher,  Die  Agada  der  babylonischen  Amoriler.  Ein  Beitrag  zur  Geschiclite 
der  Agada  und  zur  Einleitung  in  den  babylonischen  Talmud.    Strassburg,  1878. 

^  The  Jerusalem  Talmud  trcat#only  four  of  the  six  Sedarim  or  orders  of  the  Mishna, 
the  treatise  Niddah,  and  a  few  fragmentary  portions.  It  was  first  published  at  Venice 
in  1523.  Many  subsequent  editions.  A  large  part  of  it,  witii  a  Latin  translation,  is 
published  in  LTgolino's  Thesaurus  Antiiiuitatum  Sacrarum,  vols,  xvii,  xviii,  x.x,  xxv, 
and  XXX.  See  Wiinsche,  Der  jerusaleniischo  Talmud  in  seiner  haggadischen  Bestand- 
theilen,  zum  ersten  Male  ins  Deutsche  iibertragen.    Ziirich,  1880. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  617 

completed  until  about  A.  D.  550.'  The  language  of  both  Talmuds- 
is  a  corrupt  form  of  Hebrew,  a  kind  of  barbarous  mixture  of  Hebrew 
and  Aramaic,  made  specially  obscure  by  a  liberal  use  of  words  froni 
the  Arabic,  Persian,  Coptic,  Greek,  and  Latin  tongues.  The  style 
is  made  the  more  obscure  by  an  abundance  of  technical  terms  and 
abbreviations.  It  is  a  most  difficult  and  uninviting  task  for  an 
English  student  to  attempt  to  master  this  storehouse  of  Jewish, 
thought. 

On  the  general  character  of  the  Talmud  as  a  whole  Delitzsch 
remarks :  "  Those  who  have  not  in  some  degree  accomplished  the 
extremely  difficult  task  of  reading  the  work  for  themselves  will 
hardly  be  able  to  form  a  clear  idea  of  this  polynomial  colossus.  It 
is  a  vast  debating  club,  in  which  there  hum  confusedly  the  myriad 
voices  of  at  least  five  centuries.  As  we  all  know  by  experience,  a 
law,  though  very  minutely  and  exactly  defined,  may  yet  be  suscep- 
tible of  various  interpretations,  and  question  on  question  is  sure  to 
arise  when  it  comes  to  be  applied  to  the  ever-varying  circumstances- 
of  actual  life.  Suppose,  then,  you  have  about  ten  thousand  legal 
definitions  all  relating  to  Jewish  life  and  classified  under  different 
heads,  and  add  to  these  ten  thousand  definitions  of  about  five  hundred 
doctors  and  lawyers,  belonging  mostly  to  Palestine  or  Babylonia, 
who  make  these  definitions,  one  after  the  other,  the  subject  of  ex- 
amination and  debate,  and  who,  with  hair-splitting  acuteness,  exhaust 
not  only  every  possible  sense  the  words  will  bear,  but  every  pos- 
sible practical  occurrence  arising  out  of  them.  Suppose  that  the 
fine-spun  threads  of  these  legal  disquisitions  frequently  lose  them- 
selves in  digressions,  and  that,  when  one  has  waded  through  a  long 
tract  of  this  sandy  desert,  one  lights,  here  and  there,  on  some  green 
oasis  consisting  of  stories  and  sayings  of  universal  interest.  This 
done,  you  will  have  some  tolerable  idea  of  this  enormous  and,  in  its 
way,  unique  code  of  laws,  in  comparison  with  which,  in  point  of 
comprehensiveness,  the  law  books  of  all  other  nations  are  but  lilli- 
putian,  and,  when  compared  with  the  hum  of  its  kaleidoscopic  Babel, 
they  resemble,  indeed,  calm  and  studious  retreats."  "^  Nevertheless 
the  Talmud  has  for  twelve  hundred  years  exerted  a  moulding  influ- 
ence on  Jewish  thought,  and  the  later  rabbinical  exposition  of  the 
Old  Testament  Scriptures  is  deeply  imbued  with  its  spirit. 

'  The  Babylonian  Talmud  was  first  published  at  Venice,  12  vols,  fol.,  1520-1523. 
Many  subsequent  editions.  A  Latin  translation  of  three  treatises  of  this  Talmud  may 
be  found  in  Ugolino's  Thesaurus,  vols,  xix  and  xxv. 

*  Jiidisches  Handwerkerleben  zur  Zeit  Jesu,  p.  35.     Erlangen,  18J9. 


618  HISTORY   OP 


CHAPTER  II. 

LATER    RABBINICAL    EXEGESIS. 

Inasmuch  as  all  Jewish  interpretation  of  the  Old  Testament  forms 
Jewish  exposi-  "^  kind  of  world  by  itself,  we  may,  for  the  sake  of  unity 
tions    obseure   of  treatment,  attend  in  this  place  to  the  later  rabbin- 

btjcause  of  the    .      .  ,      -,  „  .   .  ^  •   ^      ,•   ^^  -,  , 

veil  on  Israel's  ical  methods  ot  exposition  whicli  lollowed  upon  the 
beart.  comj>Ietiou  of  the  Talmud,  and  which  still  obtain.     As 

long  as  the  veil,  which  is  upon  the  heart  of  Israel  (2  Cor.  iii,  1-t-lG), 
remains  unlifted,  so  that  they  cannot  discern  in  their  ancient  ora- 
-cles  the  prophecies  of  the  Lord  Christ  as  they  have  been  fulfilled  in 
Jesus  of  Nazareth,  so  long  we  may  not  expect  to  find  among  Jewish 
<;xegetes  a  clear  and  consistent  elucidation  of  the  Old  Testament. 

Although  the  Talraudists,  like  the  Pharisees  of  our  Lord's  time, 
The  sect  of  the  have  ever  been  the  more  numerous  and  popular  party 
Karaites.  among  the  Jews,  their  methods  of  teaching  were  [)rob- 

ably  never  at  any  one  period  universally  accepted  among  the  scat- 
tered tribes.  The  more  rationalistic  class,  known  in  antiquity  as 
the  Sadducees,  have  had  their  representatives  in  all  later  times, 
though  these  later  critics  have  not  continued  to  accept  the  doctrines 
known  to  have  been  once  held  by  the  Sadducees.  One  of  the  old- 
est sects  of  the  Jewish  synagogue  was  that  of  the  Karaites  (Q'^ni^, 
readers,  or  literalists),  who  rejected  the  authority  of  the  oral  law, 
and  all  the  traditions  and  precepts  of  Ilagadic  literature.  They 
did  not,  however,  refuse  to  accept  from  the  Talmud,  tradition,  or 
any  other  source,  that  which  might  serve  as  an  exegetical  aid  to  (he 
understanding  of  the  Scriptures,  nor  did  they  ignore  the  deeper 
sj)iritual  sense.  They  made  frequent  use  of  metaphorical  modes  of 
explanation,  but  studied  to  be  free  from  the  superstitions  and  fol- 
lies of  the  Talnuidists.  The  Karaites  exist,  at  tlie  present  day,  in 
greatest  numbers  in  the  Crimean  peninsula,  and  possess  an  exten- 
sive literature  on  biblical  interpretation  and  other  subjects;  but 
their  works  are  written  in  Arabic,  corrupt  Hebrew,  Turkish,  and 
other  languages  of  the  East,  and  are  little  known  to  the  western 
nations.' 

The  strict  methods  of  the  Karaites  had  much  influence  in 
restraining  the  extravagance  of  the  opposite  schools,  and  obtained 

'  See  Fiirst,  Gescbiehte  des  Karawthums  (Lpz.,  1865),  ami  Rule,  History  of  the 
Karaite  Jews,  London,  1870. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  619 

considerable  prevalence  during  the  eighth  and  ninth  centuries. 
The  celebrated  Rabbi  Saadia-Gaon,  born  in  Egypt  about  saadia  Hag- 
A.D.  892,  received  his  early  training  from  an  eminent  ^'^*^"- 
Karaite  teacher,  and  thereby  doubtless  acquired  a  freedom  from 
many  of  the  current  rabbinical  superstitions  of  his  age.  He  was 
among  the  first  of  his  race  to  cultivate  the  science  of  grammar, 
and  became  distinguished  as  a  commentator,  theologian,  and  orator. 
He  did  not  embrace  the  Karaite  doctrines,  but  contended  for  the 
necessity  of  tradition,  and  urged  that  many  precepts  of  the  Mosaic 
law,  as  well  as  numerous  Jewish  doctrines  and  historical  facts,  were 
dependent  on  oral  tradition.  He  was  the  author  of  an  Arabic  trans- 
lation (with  annotations)  of  the  Pentateuch,'  the  Book  of  Job,  the 
Psalms  of  David,  and  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah.  He  also  wrote  com- 
mentaries on  the  Song  of  Songs,  the  Minor  Prophets,  the  Book  of 
Daniel,  and  other  parts  of  the  Old  Testament.  Contemporary  with 
Saadia  was  Jeshua  Ibn  Sadal  (about  920),  who  wrote 
a  commentary  on  the  Pentateuch  and  Job;  his  son, 
Abul  Faraj  Aaron,  also  wrote  an  Arabic  commentary  on  the  Penta- 
teuch. Other  less  noted  Jewish  scholars  wrote  similar  works  about 
the  same  period.* 

One  of  the  most  eminent  of  the  Karaite  exegetes  was  Japheth 
Ben  Ali,  who  flourished  at  Basra,  in  Arabia,  in  the  japheth  Ben 
latter  part  of  the  tenth  century.  "  His  gigantic  com-  ^^• 
mentaries,"  says  Ginsburg,  "  must  have  exercised  great  influence  on 
the  development  of  biblical  exegesis,  as  may  be  concluded  from  the 
fact  that  Aben  Ezra  had  them  constantly  before  him  when  writing 
his  expositions  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  that  he  quotes  them  with 
the  greatest  respect.  The  manuscripts  of  these  commentaries, 
which  consist  of  twenty  large  volumes,  are  in  Paris  and  Leyden. 
The  eminent  orientalist,  Munk,  brought,  in  1841,  from  Egypt  to  the 
royal  library  at  Paris,  eleven  volumes,  five  of  which  are  on  Genesis, 
and  many  sections  of  Exodus,  Leviticus,  and  Numbers;  two  vol- 
umes are  on  the  Psalms,  one  is  on  Proverbs,  and  one  on  the  five 
Megilloth.  The  commentaries,  which  are  in  Arabic,  are  preceded 
by  the  Hebrew  text  and  an  Arabic  translation."  ^ 

From  the  tenth  century  and  onward  a  more  grammatical  and 
thorough  exegesis  obtained  among  the  learned  Jews.  The  influ- 
ence of  the  Karaites,  and  the  studies  and  disputes  of  the  rabbinical 

'  Saadia's  Arabic  version  of  the  Pentateuch  is  published  in  the  Paris  and  London 
Poly  plots. 

"^  See  Fiirst's  Contribution  to  the  History  of  Hebrew  Lexicography,  prefixed  to  his 
Hebrew  and  Chaldee  Lexicon. 

*  Kitto's  Cycloptedia  of  Biblical  Literature,  article  Japheth  Ben  Ali. 


620  HISTORY    OF 

schools  at  Tiberias  in  Palestine,  and  of  Sora  and  Pumbaditlia  in 
More  gram-  Babylonia,  all  had  this  necessary  effect.  "About  this 
maticaiturnof   time,"  savs  Nordheimer,  "occurred  the  dispute  resi)ect- 

Jewisli  studies    .  \,        ''      .  ,.  ^      ,       t-.-i  ,      , 

in  tenth  cen-  "ig  the  various  readings  of  the  Bible  between  Aaron 
^'"'y-  Ben  Asher  of  Tiberias  and  Jacob  Ben  Naphtali  of  Puin- 

baditha,  from  which  dates  the  general  collection  of  such  readings 
and  their  division  into  tAvo  classes,  called,  after  those  who  used 
them.  Oriental  and  Occidental.  From  the  period  when  the  Jewish 
mind  ceased  to  be  fettered  by  the  almost  despotic  power  of  their 
spiritual  and  secular  rulers,  other  branches  of  knowledge,  as  phi- 
losophy, philology,  and  poetry,  began  to  be  cultivated  among  the 
rabbis,  although  long  held  subordinate  to  the  study  of  the  Talmud, 
and  considered  simply  in  the  light  of  auxiliaries  to  the  religious 
and  moral  teachings  of  the  synagogue.  The  attention  of  the  rabbis 
and  other  learned  men  of  the  time  was,  accordingly,  directed  for 
the  most  part  to  Talmudic  explanations  of  the  Scriptures,  and  to 
polemical  treatises  in  defence  of  the  Mosaic  religion  against  Chris- 
tianity and  Islamism." ' 

One  of  the  most  distinguished  scholars  of  this  period  was  Rabbi 
Solomon  Isaac,  commonly  called  Rashi  (sometimes  erro- 

Rashi 

neously  Jarchi).  He  was  born  at  Troyes,  in  France, 
about  A.  D.  1040,  and  at  an  early  age  became  notably  proficient  in 
his  acquaintance  with  the  Scriptures  and  the  Talmud.  ]\[uch  of 
his  life  was  spent  in  travel  and  visiting  the  different  seats  of  learn- 
ing in  Germany,  Italy,  Greece,  Palestine,  Egypt,  and  Persia.  He 
wrote  commentaries  on  the  entire  Old  Testament  (excepting  Job 
and  Chronicles),  and  also  on  a  large  portion  of  the  Talmud.  His 
commentaries  on  the  Scrijitures  are  printed  in  the  great  rabbin- 
ical Bibles,  and  are  regarded  by  the  Jewish  people  as  almost  a  part 
of  the  Bible  itself.  His  method  is  to  give  a  simple  and  literal 
explanation  of  the  Hebrew  text,  but  his  great  devotion  to  the  Tal- 
mud led  him  to  attemi)t  a  combination  of  the  Ilalachic  and  Hao^adic 
fancies  with  the  literal  sense.  This  course  often  involved  him  in 
manifest  contradictions  and  inconsistency.  His  effort  to  condense 
and  abbreviate  makes  his  style  very  obscure,  and  several  Jewish 
scholars  have  written  commentaries  on  his  expositions  in  order  to 
elucidate  some  of  his  perplexing  passages.^ 

'  The  Rabbis  and  their  Literature ;  article  in  the  American  Biblical  Repository  for 
July,  1841,  p.  162. 

*  All  Rashi's  commentai'ies,  together  with  several  Jewish  commentaries  upon  them, 
were  translated  into  Latin  by  Breithaupt,  and  accompanied  by  extensive  annotations, 
four  vols.,  (lotlia,  1710-14.  Specimens  of  .Jcwisli  coinnicnlaiy,  translated  into  En- 
frli.~li,  and  representing  Rashi,  Kimclii,  Aben  Ezra,  Saadia,  and  Maimonides,  are  given 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  621 

Rabbi  Joshua  Ben  Jeliudah,  a  famous  Karaite  commentator,  also 
lived  in  the  eleventh  century.  His  expositions  are  said  josima  Ben 
to  cover  all  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  but  they  ■^u'^'^''- 
exist  only  in  manuscript.  He  is  often  quoted  by  Aben  Ezra.  He 
was  distinguished  as  a  philosopher  and  grammarian  as  well  as  a 
learned  exegete. 

As  ihe  Jews  became  more  and  more  scattered  abroad,  rabbinical 
schools  and  learned  teachers  arose  in  different  places.  The  spanisn 
and  not  the  least  noted  were  those  of  Spain.  During  schools, 
the  rule  of  the  Moors  in  Spain  tlie  Jewish  population  of  that  coun- 
try enjoyed  great  liberties,  and  many  who  fled  from  persecution  in 
other  lands  found  a  refuge  and  protection  there.  Already  the  cab- 
alistic philosophy  and  mysticism,  as  represented  in  the  books  Jez- 
irah  and  Zohar,^  had  become  widespread,  and,  indeed,  Jewish 
thought  had  always  manifested  a  tendency  to  indulge  in  mystic 
fancy.     But  against  this  tendency,  and  in  favour  of   a  thorough 

grammatical  interijretation,  was  Aben  Ezra  of  Toledo. 

IP  ,•  ^  •     ^•  n  Aben  Ezra. 

We  know  but  little  of  the  facts  of  his  lire,  save  that  he 

was  born  in  1092,  travelled  extensively,  and  was  regarded  as  second 
to  none  of  the  great  rabbinical  scholars  of  the  Middle  Ages.  His 
greatest  work  is  a  commentary  on  the  Pentateuch  which  is  pub- 
lished in  the  rabbinical  Bibles,  and  also  separately.  His  hermeneutical 
principles  may  be  best  inferred  from  the  following  passage  in  the 
preface  to  his  Commentary  on  Genesis:  "Those  rabbis  who  reside 
auKing  the  Arabs  take  occasion  to  connect  the  study  of  biblical 
interpretation  with  that  of  natural  history  and  metaphysics;  but 
every  one  who  desires  to  become  acquainted  with  these  sciences 
will  do  better  to  study  them  in  books  that  treat  of  them  alone. 
Others,  as  the  Karaites,  seek  to  explain  all  these  matters  from  the 
Bible,  and  to  establish  them  upon  what  is  there  contained.  A 
third  class,  the  Cabalists,  grope  in  total  darkness,  thinking  to  dis- 
cover symbols  in  every  part  of  the  laAv;  the  errors  of  these  men 
scarcely  deserve  a  serious  refutation;  although  in  one  respect  they 
are  right,  viz.,  in  asserting  that  all  laws  are  to  be  weighed  in  the 
balance  of  reason — for  in  every  heart  is  a  mind  which  is  a  reliection 
of  God's  Spirit,  and  when  this  is  opposed  to  the  literal  acceptance 

in  Turner's  useful  little  volume  entitled  Biographical  Notices  of  some  of  the  Most  Dis- 
tinguished Jewish  Rabbis,  and  translations  of  portions  of  their  commentaries.  New- 
York,  1847. 

'  See  the  articles  Cabala  (or  Kabalali),  Jezirah,  and  Zohar,  in  the  Cvclopajdias  of 
Herzog,  Kitto,  and  M'Clintock  and  Strong.  See  also  the  Kabbalah;  its  Doctrines, 
Development,  and  Literature;  an  Essay,  by  C.  D.  Ginsburg  (London,  1865);  and 
Franck,  La  Kabbale ;  ou  La  Pliilosophie  Rcligieuse  des  Hebreux.     Paris,  1843. 


633  HISTORY   OF 

of  the  Scripture,  a  deeper  meaning  is  to  be  looked  for,  reason  being 
the  messenger  between  God  and  man.  If,  however,  the  plain  in- 
terpretation of  a  passage  be  not  opposed  to  reason,  why  should  we 
seek  for  any  other?  Notwithstanding,  there  are  phrases  Avhich  con- 
tain both  a  literal  and  an  allegorical  meaning,  as,  for  instance,  the 
terms  circumcision  and  tree  of  knoicledge.  A  fourth  class  explain 
everything  according  to  the  Hagadah  without  regard  to  the  laws 
of  grammar;  but  what  purpose  is  served  by  repeating  the  often 
contradictory  views  that  have  been  ah'eady  detailed  in  so  many 
Talmudic  writings  ?  Some  of  these  Hagadic  explanations  have,  in- 
deed, a  deeper  meaning  than  appears  on  the  surface;  but  the  major- 
ity of  them  are  designed  merely  as  an  agreeable  relaxation  for  the 
mind  when  wearied  by  the  study  of  the  Halachah.  A  fifth  method 
is  that  followed  by  myself:  this  is,  first  to  determine  the  grammat- 
ical sense  of  a  passage;  next  to  consult  the  Chaldee  version  of 
Onkelos,  although  this,  especially  in  the  poetical  portions,  often 
departs  from  the  simple  meaning;  and  for  the  legislative  books  of 
the  Bible  I  call  in  the  aid  of  tradition." 

We  note  here  the  strong  hold  which  Talmudic  study  and  Jewish 
tradition  had  upon  the  mind  of  Aben  Ezra,  but  it  is  remarkable 
that  he  should  nevertheless  become  so  free  from  Hagadic  fancies 
in  an  age  Avhen  that  style  of  exegesis  extensively  prevailed.  De- 
spite his  occasional  allegorizing,  and  self-amusement  in  cabalistic 
trifling,  his  exegetical  works  are  full  of  varied  learning  and  valu- 
able suggestions.' 

Moses  Maimonides,  often  called  Rambam,  was  born  at  Cordova, 
MosesMaimon-  A.  D.  1135.  AVhile  yet  a  youth  he  became  thoroughly 
Ides.  instructed  by  his  father  in  Hebrew  and  Talmudic  lit- 

erature, and  in  mathematics  and  astronomy.  When  only  thirteen 
years  old  he  was  obliged  to  leave  Spain  on  account  of  Mohammedan 
persecution,  and  went  to  Accho,  Jerusalem,  Hebron,  and  finally 
settled  in  Egy2)t,  where,  about  11G8,  he  completed  his  great  com- 
mentary on  the  Mishna,  and  published  it  with  the  title  of  Book  of 
Light.  This  Avas  written  in  Arabic,  and  afterward  translated  into 
Hebrew,  and  has  been  published  in  -nany  editions,  generally  along 
with  the  text  of  the  Mishna.  His  great  aim  Avas  to  harmonizo 
Judaism  with  science  and  philosophy,  and  so  great  became  his  in- 
fluence and  authority  as  a  teacher  that  he  was  resorted  to  by  Jewi\ 
from  all  lands  as  the  great  oracle  in  matters  of  religion.  He  sub- 
sequently  published  another  work  of  even  greater  magnitude  than 
the  former,  which  he  called  Second  Law  (Mishna-Torah),  or  iho 

'  See  Turner,  Biofxraphical  Notices   of   some  of  the  Most  Distiuguishea  Rabbis, 
pp.  81-34.     New  York,  1847. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  623 

Mighty  Hand  (npmn  T,  Yad  Hachezahali).  It  consists  of  fourteen 
books  (n"i=14),  and  is  a  cycloi:)8edia  of  biblical  and  Jewish  literature. 
Each  article  furnishes  a  lucid  abstract  of  the  ancient  traditional 
expositions  of  those  who  were  regarded  as  the  highest  authorities 
in  their  respective  departments.  It  was  like  the  creation  of  a  new 
Talmud,  and  marked  the  beginning  of  a  new  epoch  in  Judaism. 
His  third  great  work  was  entitled  Moreh  Nebuchim  (n-nUJ  mio), 
or  Guide  of  the  Perplexed.  "This  religio-philosophical  work," 
says  (jinsburg,  "  created  a  new  epoch  in  the  philosophy  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages.  Not  only  did  Mohammedans  write  commentaries  on  it, 
but  the  Christian  schoolmen  learned  from  it  how  to  harmonize  the 
conflicts  between  religion  and  philosophy.  The  great  aim  of  Mai- 
monides — to  harmonize  in  his  writings  the  written  and  the  oral 
law — obliged  him  to  reject  many  things  in  the  rabbinic  writings 
which  many  of  his  talmudic  brethren  held  inviolably  sacred.  ^  This 
involved  him  in  extensive  and  painful  controversies  during  the  rest 
of  his  life,  and  he  had  the  mortification- of  seeing  the  Jewish  nation 
divided  into  two  parties ;  the  one  fighting  with  anathemas  against 
him,  regarding  him  as  a  heretic,  and  consigning  his  work  to  the 
flames,  and  the  other  defending  him  as  an  angel,  the  messenger  of 
a  new  covenant.  In  the  midst  of  this  conflict  the  '  Great  Luminary* 
of  the  Jewish  nation  was  extinguished  Dec.  13,  1204.'"  Notwith- 
standing all  the  opposition  to  some  of  his  views  which  has  here  and 
there  been  made,  there  is  probably  no  Jewish  name  more  honoured 
than  that  of  Maimonides.  His  works  have  appeared  in  many  edi- 
tions and  translations,  and  the  Jews  have  a  saying  that  "  from 
Moses  even  until  Moses  there  has  not  arisen  one  like  Moses."  He 
has  been  honoured  with  the  titles  of  "the  Great  Luminary,"  "the 
Glory  of  Israel,"  and  "the  Second  Moses."* 

Other  Spanish  Jews  who  greatly  promoted  the  inteiests  of  He- 
brew grammar  and  philology  were  Ibn  Balaam,  of  Seville,  Salomon 
Ben  Jehuda,  of  Malaga,  and  Ibn  Giath  (Isaac  Ben  Jehudah),  who 
is  said  to  have  written  a  commentary  on  Ecclesiastes.     But  of  far 

'  Kitto's  Cyclopaedia  of  Biblical  Literature,  article  Maimonides.  For  an  account  of 
the  editions  and  translations  of  Maimonides'  works,  comp.  also  M'Clintock  and  Strong's 
Cyclopaedia,  article  Maimonides. 

*  "  No  man  since  Ezra,"  says  Wise,  "  had  exerted  so  deep,  universal,  and  lasting  an. 
influence  on  Jews  and  Judaism  as  Moses  Maimonides.  His  theologico-philosophical 
works  gained  an  authority  among  the  progressive  thinkers  equal  to  his  Mishna-Torah 
among  rabbinical  students.  All  Jewish  thinkers  up  to  date — Baruch  Spinoza,  Moses 
Mendelssohn,  and  the  writers  of  the  nineteenth  century  included — are  more  or  less  the 
disciples  of  Maimonides;  so  that  no  Jewish  theologico-philosophical. book,  from  and 
after  A.  D.  1200,  can  be  picked  up  in  whidi  the  ideas  of  Maimonides  form  not  a 
prominent  part." — The  Israelite  for  Dec.  1,  18V1. 


624  HISTORY  OF 

greater  fame  in  exegetical  literature  were  the  three  Kimchis,  father 
and  two  sons.  Joseph  Kimchi,  the  father  of  Moses  and 
David  Kimc'lii,  was  born  in  the  latter  part  of  the  elev- 
enth century,  but  was  driven  from  Spain  by  Mohammedan  persecu- 
tion, and  settled  ai  Narbonne,  in  France,  where  he  introduced  the 
thorough  methods  of  scriptural  study  for  which  the  Spanish  Jews 
had  become  justly  celebrated.  He  has  been  called  the  Aben  Ezra 
of  Southern  France.  He  wrote  commentaries  on  the  Pentateuch 
and  the  Prophets,  and  on  Job  and  Proverbs.  He  excelled' espe- 
cially as  a  theologian  and  polemical  writer,  and  was  the  author  of 
several  treatises  against  Christianity. 

Moses  Kimchi,  the  eldest  son  of  the  preceding,  was  the  author  of 
several  treatises  on  grammar,  and  of  commentaries  on  Proverbs, 
Ezra,  and  Nehemiah,  which  are  printed  in  the  rabbinical  Bibles, 
and  are  much  esteemed  by  Jewish  scholars.  But  the  most  distin- 
guished of  this  name  was  David,  son  of  Joseph  and  brother  of  Moses 
Kimchi,  born  at  Narbonne  about  A.  D.  1160.     He  is  often  called 

by  the  Jews  Redak  (from  the  initial  letters  p  T  1,  Rabbi 
Redak.  ...  . 

David  Kimchi).     He  defended  the  simple  grammatical 

method  of  exposition  against  the  Jewish  M^'iters  of  his  time  who 
adopted  Hagadic  and  cabalistic  opinions,  and  also  defended  Maimon- 
ides  in  the  disputes  which  arose  over  the  publication  of  his  Moreh 
Nebuchim.  He  wrote  commentaries  on  the  Pentateuch,  the  earlier 
and  later  prophets,  the  Psalms,  anrl  the  Books  of  Job,  Ruth,  and 
Chronicles,  most  of  which  have  been  published  in  the  rabbinical 
Bibles.'  Christian  scholars  of  his  time  and  long  after  were  greatly 
influenced  by  his  writings,  and  used  them  freely  in  the  preparation 
of  their  lexical  and  grammatical  works. 

About  A.  D.   1201   Bechai,   or  Bachja  Ben  Asher,  composed  a 
commentary  on  the  Pentateuch.     He  aimed,  however,  to 
exhibit  a  fourfold  sense  in  the  Scriptures,  the  grammat- 
ical, rational,  allegorical,  and  cabalistic.'^ 

Ibn  Caspi,  born  in  France  about  1280,  deserves  honourable  men- 
tion among  Jewish  scholars  and  exegetes.  He  early  be- 
came a  great  admirer  of  Maimonidcs,  and  travelled  in 
many  lands  to  perfect  his  studies.  He  composed  commentaries  on 
Proverbs,  the  Song  of  Songs,  Ecclesiastes,  and  several  of  the 
prophets,  but  only  a  few  portions  of  his  exegetical  works  have  yet 
been  published.     He  appears  to  have  discarded  the  allegorical  and 

'  lijitiii  translations  of  David  Kimchi's  commentaries  on  Isaiali,  Joel,  Jonah,  and  tlie 
Psalms  have  been  published  at  various  plaees,  and  an  Enj^lish  translation  of  his  com- 
mentary on  Zechariah  and  Preface  to  the  Psalms  by  M'Caui  appeared  at  London,  1837. 

*  Comp.  J'iirst,  Bil)liotlieca  Judaica,  vol.  i,  p.  75. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  625 

mystical  methods  of  interpretation  current  in  his  day,  and  to  have 
maintained  the  simple  grammatical  import  of  the  Scriptures.' 

In  the  latter  part  of  the  thirteenth  century  Jewish  biblical 
exeo-esis  received  some  valuable  contributions  from  Tanchum  Ben 
Joseph  of  Jerusalem.  He  wrote  commentaries  in  Arabic 
on  the  entire  Old  Testament,  most  of  which  are  said  to 
be  still  extant  in  manuscript  in  the  Bodleian  Library.  Those  on 
Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  Kings,  and  Lamentations  have  been  pub- 
lished, and  show  that  his  general  method  is  that  of  a  free  and 
rational  interpretation.^ 

Levi  Ben  Gershon,  commonly  called  Ralbag  (also  Gershonides), 
flourished  in  France  at  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth 
century,  and  published  commentaries  on  nearly  all  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  most  of  which  have  been  published  in 
the  rabbinical  Bibles.  His  habit  is  first  to  give  an  explanation  of 
the  words  of  a  section,  then  set  forth  the  sense  according  to  the 
context,  and  finally  to  make  a  practical  application  of  the  whole.^ 

Ibn  Danan,  who  flourished  at  Grenada  A.  D.  1460-1502,  acquired 
distinction  by  several  learned  works  on  the  Criticism  and 
Interpretation  of  the  Old  Testament.    His  Commentary 
on  Isa.  liii  is  noted  for  its  opposition  to  the  anti-Messianic  exposition 
of  that  Scripture  by  Ibn  Caspi. 

Another  famous  rabbi  of  this  period  was  Isaac  Abrabanel,  born 
at  Lisbon  in  1437,  and  died  at  Venice  in  1508.  His  work 
entitled  Mashmia  Yeshuah  (nyiCi'''  yoti'O,  Herald  of  Sal- 
vation) furnishes  a  complete  view  of  the  Jewish  doctrine  of  the 
Messiah.  He  was  also  the  author  of  commentaries  on  the  Penta- 
teuch, the  earlier  and  later  Prophets,  and  on  Daniel.  He  is  regard- 
ed by  later  Jewish  writers  as  almost  the  equal  of  Maimonides.  His 
exegetical  method  is  in  the  main  sound  and  useful,  and  he  studies 
to  bring  out  the  primary  and  literal  sense  of  the  Scriptures.^ 

'  Parts  of  Ibn  Caspi's  Commentary  on  Proverbs  -were  published  by  Werblumer  in 
1846,  and  an  analysis  of  his  work  on  Ecclesiastes,  and  Introduction  to  Song  of  Songs 
is  given  in  Ginsburg's  commentaries  on  these  books. 

'■'  Tanchum's  Arabic  Commentary  on  Judges  i-xii  was  published  by  Sehnurrer,  Tiib., 
1791;  chaps,  xii-xxi,  by  Haarbriicker,  Halle,  1847;  on  Samuel  and  Kings,  Lpz.,  1844; 
and  on  Joshua,  Berl.,  1862.  His  Habakkuk  was  published  with  a  French  translation 
by  Munk,  in  Cahen's  Bible  (vol.  xiii),  Paris,  1843. 

^  Excerpts  of  Ralbag's  commentaries  on  the  Pentateuch  and  the  earlier  prophets  are 
given  in  a  Jewish-German  version  in  Jekutiel's  German  version  of  the  Bible,  Amsterd., 
1676-78,  and  a  Latin  translation  of  his  Proverbs  was  published  by  Ghigghco,  Milan,  1620. 

•*  Abraljanel's  commentaries  have  been  issued  in  many  editions.     A  Latin  transla- 
tion of  his  Commentary  on  the  Pentateuch  was  published  at  Hannover,  1710*  on  the 
«arlier  prophets,  Lips.,  1686  ;  on  Isaiah,  Frankfurt,  1711. 
40 


626  HISTORY  OF 

Among  other  Jewish  writers  who  contributed  to  the  literature  of 
urbino  and  ^^^  Testament  exegesis,  we  find  Solomon  Ben  Abraham 
Norzi.  Urbino,  the  author  of  a  Lexicon  of  the  S5'nonymes  of 

the  Old  Testament,  illustrated  by  quotations  from  the  Bible,  the 
Targums,  and  the  works  of  the  great  Hebrew  philologists  of  the 
preceding  ages.'  Another  distinguished  name  is  Salomon  Jedidja, 
commonly  called  Norzi,  an  Italian  rabbi,  born  about  15G0,  Avhose 
great  work  was  a  critical  edition  of  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  Bible. 
For  this  purpose  he  made  a  very  extensive  collation  and  use  of  all 
the  various  readings  he  could  find  in  manuscripts,  Midrash,  Talmud, 
and  the  whole  cycle  of  rabbinical  literature.  His  work  remained 
in  manuscript  for  more  than  a  hundred  years,  and  was  published 
by  Basila,  in  two  volumes,  Mantua,  1742-44.  A  second  edition 
appeared  at  Vienna  in  1816. 

Ibn  Chajim,  born  at  Fez,  in  Africa,  about  1570,  wrote  a  com- 
mentary on  Joshua,  parts  of  which  are  published  in  Frank- 
■'"^"    furter's  great  Rabbinical  Bible.    He  also  wrote  a  treatise 
on  Rabbi  Ishmael's  thirteen  rules  for  interpreting  the  Scriptures. 
It  was  in  the   sixteenth  century,   also,   that  Rabbi   Salomon  Ben 
Melech  wrote  his  commentary  on  the  whole  Bible,  Avhich 
Bleek  describes  as  "  short  and  condensed,  giving  almost 
exclusively  grammatical  and  lexicographical  explanations,  mostly 
from  Kirachi's  writings."  ^    About  the  year  1 594,  Laniado, 
an  Italian  rabbi,  became  noted  by  the  publication  of  a 
commentary  on  the  Pentateuch,  which  he  entitled  Delightful  Ves- 
sel (mon  ^iJD),     He  also  wrote   commentaries  on  Joshua,  Judges, 
Samuel,  and  Kings,  which  he  called  Precious  Vessel  ("ip^  *7^),  ex- 
cerpts of  which  are  printed  in  Frankfurter's  Rabbinical  Bible;  alsa 
a  commentary  on  Isaiah,  entitled  Vessel  of  Pure  Gold  (TS  ''72).     His 
expositions  consist  chiefly  of  extracts  from  Rashi,  Aben-Ezra,  and 
Ralbag.^     Abraham  Ben  Isaac  Laniado,  another  Italian  rabbi,  also 
wrote  comments  on  the  Pentateuch,  and  on  several  books  of  the 
Ilagiographa,  which  still  remain  in  manuscript. 

Elias  Levita  flourished  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  sixteenth  century, 

and  was  one  of  the  most  learned  Jewish  scholars  of  any 
Ellas  Levita.  ^_  i  tt  i 

asre.     He  wrote  numerous  works  on   liclirew  o-rammar 

and  philology,  some  of  which  have  an  enduring  merit.     His  most 

celebrated  treatise   is  entitled  miD?3n  miD?D,   jMasoreth   ham-^Iaso- 

T     -  V  T   " 

reth,  and  is  a  work  of  remarkable  scholarship,  displaying  thorough 

■  Tlli^s  lexicon  was  published  at  Venice  in  1548,  but  is  now  very  rare. 
'  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  vol.  i,  pp.  115,  116. 

'His  Pentateuch  was  published  at  Venice,    159-i;    his  work  on  Joshua — Kings,. 
Venice,  160.3;  and  his  Isaiah  in  1657. 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION.  6OT 

acquaintance  with  all  questions  pertaining  to  the  Hebrew  text  of  the 
Old  Testament.^  It  is,  says  Holmes,  "  an  elaborate  treatise  on  the 
criticism  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  Among  the  many  interesting 
toj^ics  discussed  in  it,  the  question  of  the  vowel  points  attracted 
special  notice,  owing  to  the  author's  assertion  of  their  modern  ori- 
gin. He  was  the  first  to  give  prominence  to  the  opinion  which  has 
since  been  adopted  by  most  of  the  learned,  whether  British  or  for- 
eign, that  the  Hebrew  points  were  invented  about  five  hundred 
years  after  Christ,  by  the  Masoretic  doctors  of  the  school  of  Tibe- 
rias, in  order  to  indicate  and  fix  the  genuine  pronunciation  of  the 
sacred  language."  ^ 

We  have  now  traced  the  course  of  Jewish  biblical  exegesis  down 

to  the  period  of  the  Protestant  Reformation.     Beyond  ^^    „  , 

i        _  ...  The  Reforma- 

this  point  it  seems  unnecessary  to  follow  it  as  distinct  tion  a  turning 
from  the  general  history  of  biblical  interpretation.  ^°^° ' 
Since  the  time  of  the  Buxtorfs,  about  the  beginning  of  the  seven- 
teenth century,  Hebrew  and  rabbinical  learning  has  not  been  the 
sole  possession  of  the  Jew.  The  best  Christian  exegetes  have  made 
free  use  of  accessible  Jewish  literature,  and  regard  a  thorough  ac- 
quaintance with  the  Hebrew  language  as  essential  to  the  complete 
exposition  of  the  Old  Testament.  On  the  other  hand,  the  best  Jew- 
isli  expositors  no  longer  allow  themselves  to  be  so  trammelled  by 
Talmudic  lore  as  to  regard  the  storehouse  of  ancient  Halachah  and 
Hagadah  as  a  great  authority.  The  modern  Jewish  spirit  and  its 
methods  of  exegesis  are  well  represented  in  Moses  Men-  Moses  Men- 
delssohn, who  flourished  in  the  latter  half  of  the  eight-  deissohn. 
eenth  century.  Intimate  with  Lessing  and  Nicolai,  and  familiar 
with  the  ideas  of  the  great  philosophers  of  his  time,  he  nevertheless 
held  to  the  principles  of  Maimonides,  with  whose  work,  the  Moreh 
Nebuchim,  he  early  became  fascinated,  maintained  his  ancestr^ 
faith,  and  acquired  the  title  of  both  the  Jewish  Socrates  and  the 
Jewish  Plato.  He  published  a  Hebrew  commentary  on  Ecclesi- 
astes,  and  an  elaborate  introduction  to  the  Pentateuch,  in  which  he 
discussed  various  topics  connected  with  biblical  interpretation.  He 
prepared  also  a  German  translation  of  the  Pentateuch,  which,  with 
his  introduction  just  named,  and  with  a  grammatical  and  critical 
commentary  in  Hebrew,  contributed  by  several  Jewish  literati,  was 
published  at  Berlin,  1V80-83.     He  was  also  the  author  of  a  German 

'  The  best  edition  is  that  of  C.  D.  Ginsbiirpc:  The  Masoreth  ITa-Masoreth  of  Elias 
Levita,  being  an  Exposition  of  the  Masoretic  Notes  of  the  Hebrew  Bible;  or,  the  An- 
cient Critical  Apparatus  of  the  Old  Testament.  In  Hebrew,  with  an  English  Transla- 
tion and  Critical  and  Explanatory  Notes.     Lond.,  1867.    8vo. 

^  Kitto's  Cyclopasdia  of  Biblical  Literature  ;  article,  Elias  Levita. 


628  HISTORY    OF 

version  of  the  Psalms  and  of  the  Song  of  Songs.'  "Nothing,"  says 
Pick,  "  could  have  more  powerfully  affected  the  orientalism  of  his 
countrymen  than  these  efforts  of  Mendelssohn  for  biblical  criticism 
from  a  modern  Platonic  standpoint.  The  new  medium  of  vision 
brought  new  insight;  critical  inquiry  took  the  place  of  fanaticism; 
the  divergences  of  Semitic  and  European  thought  proved  not  so 
irreconcilable  after  all.  Cabalism  and  other  kindred  superstitions 
quietly  dropped  out  of  sight;  the  old  dialectical  barbarism  was  ex- 
tirpated; the  Jews  who  read  his  Scriptures  in  the  translation  attained 
purity  of  idiom,  and  with  it  the  power  of  appreciating  the  Avritings 
of  the  great  minds  of  Germany,  to  whom  they  had  remained  stran- 
gers. Ere  long  the  best  minds  of  the  race  became  thoroughly 
associated  with  the  intellectual  movement  of  Germany,  content  to 
abandon  mystical  ambitions  and  theocratic  pretensions,  and  to  find 
their  Canaan  in  Europe."^ 

It  should,  however,  be  observed  that  the  general  drift  of  the 

,,  ,  ,  ,  most  advanced  modern  Jewish  thought  is  strongly  to- 
Modern   JiKla-  '^  .  °  *' 

ism  rationaiis-  ward  rationalism.  The  leading  representatives  of  this 
^^^'  progressive  Judaism,  as  it  is  often  called,  are  Unitarian 

in  theology,  and  make  their  highest  appeal  to  reason  and  conscience 
in  the  exposition  of  the  Scriptures.  They  reject  the  doctrine  of  a 
Messiah  yet  to  come,  and  the  future  restoration  of  Israel  to  Pales- 
tine, with  the  revival  of  sacrificial  woi>hip.  They  discard  the  evi- 
dence of  miracles,  the  doctrine  of  a  resurrection  of  the  body,  and 
allow  no  authority  to  the  Talmud  above  any  other  collection  of 
human  opinions.  Even  the  so-called  conservative  Judaism  is  not 
altogether  free  from  the  influences  of  rationalism. 

It  is  apparent,  from  the  foregoing,  sketch  of  Jewish  and  rabbin- 
Generai  sum-  i^ial  interpretation,  that  a  vast  library  of  exegetical  the- 
^'^■■y-  ology  is  extant  in  the  published  and  un])ublished  writ- 

ings of  that  w(inderful  race  to  whom  the  sacred  oracles  were  first 
entrusted.  Much  of  this  literature  is,  without  doubt,  of  very  little 
value,  especially  the  more  ancient  expositions.  Until  the  ninth  and 
tenth  centuries  of  our  era  we  find  scarcely  anything  that  looks  like 
a  considerate  grammatical  method  of  interpretation.  But  in  such 
writers  as  Rashi,  Aben-Ezra,  Maiinonides,  and  David  Kimchi,  ])ri)m- 
inence  is  given  to  the  great  princij)les  of  grammatico-historical 
interpretation  which  are  generally  accepted  by  all  the  leading  bibli- 
cal critics  and  expositors  of  the  present  day. 

'  Mendelssohn's  complete  works  were  collected  and  edited  by  his  j^randson,  (!.  B. 
ilendelssohn,  7  vols.     Leipsic,  1843-45. 

*  M'Clintock  and  Strong's  Cyclopaedia  of  Biblical,  Theological,  and  Ecclesiastical 
Literature,  article  Mendelssohn. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  629 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE    EARLIEST    CHRISTIAN    EXEGESIS. 

We  naturally  look  to  the  New  Testament  for  the  earliest  indica- 
tions of  the  spirit  and  methods  of  Christian  exegesis.  Methods  of 
The  divine  Founder  of  Christianity  constantly  appealed   christian  exe- 

T        c^      •    ,  eiiz-viTm,  -  ^xi  gesis  indicated 

to  the  scriptures  oi  the  Uld  lestament  as  to  a  saci'ed  in  the  New 
authority,  and  declared  that  they  bore  testimony  to  him-  Testament, 
self  (John  v,  39;  comp.  Luke  xxiv,  27).  With  equal  emphasis  did 
he  condemn  the  current  Halachic  and  Hagadic  tradition  of  the  i 
elders,  which  in  some  instances  nullified  the  commandments  of  God  I 
(Matt.  XV,  1-9;  Mark  vii,  1-13).  He  reproved  the  Sadducees  also 
for  not  understanding  the  Scriptures  and  the  power  of  God  (Matt, 
xxii,  29).  The  error  of  the  disciples  in  construing  the  prophecy  of 
the  coming  of  Elijah  (Mai.  iv,  5)  to  mean  a  literal  i-eturn  of  the 
ancient  Tishbite — an  error  which  they  had  received  from  the  scribes 
— was  exposed  by  showing  that  the  "spirit  and  power  of  Elijah" 
(Luke  i,  17)  had  reappeared  in  John  the  Baptist  (Matt,  xi,  14;  xvii, 
10-13),  Paul  makes  mention  of  his  proficiency  in  Judaism  [ev  roy 
'Io7;(Jai(7jUw),  and  his  excessive  zeal  for  the  traditions  of  his  fathers, 
for  which  he  was  noted  before  his  conversion  (Gal.  i,  13,  14);  but 
after  it  pleased  God  to  give  4iim  the  revelation  of  his  grace  in  Jesus 
Christ  he  denounced  "  Jewish  fables  and  commandments  of  men 
who  turn  away  fi"om  the  truth"  (Titus  i,  14),  and  also  "foolish, 
questionings  and  genealogies  and  strife  and  fightings  (or  controver- 
sies) about  the  law  "  (Titus  iii,  9).  He  counselled  Timothy  to  "  turn 
away  from  the  profane  babblings  and  oppositions  of  the  falsely 
named  knowledge "  (rrjg  rpevdojvviwv  yvcjoeiog,  I  Tim.  vi,  20),  and 
warned  the  Colossians  against  the  spoiling  tendencies  of  "philoso- 
phy and  vain  deceit,  after  the  tradition  of  men,  after  the  rudiments 
of  the  world,  and  not  after  Christ"  (Col.  ii,  8;  comp.  1  Tim.  i,  4; 
iv,  7;  2  Tim.  ii,  14-16,  23).  In  these  admonitions  and  warnings 
tliere  is  a  manifest  reference  to  the  Jewish  Midrashim  and  the  spec-  i 
ulative  tendencies  of  that  age.  It  was  a  time  of  intense  mental 
activity  throughout  the  Roman  world,  especially  in  the  more  east- 
ern cities  where  Greek  philosophy  and  oriental  mysticism  met  and 
blended,  as  in  the  case  of  Philo  of  Alexandria.  The  Hagadic  meth- 
endless  genealogies  and  the  falsely  named  knowledge  ods condemned, 
indicate  the  beginnings  of  heretical  Gnosticism,  already  disturbing 


630  HISTORY    OF 

the  faith  and  practice  of  the  Christian  Church.  From  all  which  it 
appears  that  neither  the  Hagadic  exegesis  and  ancestral  traditions 
of  the  Jews,  nor  the  allegorizing  and  speculative  habit  of  Hellen- 
ists like  Philo,  received  any  encouragement  from  Christ  or  his  apos- 
tles. Paul's  single  instance  of  allegorizing  the  history  of  Hagar 
and  Sarah  was,  as  we  have  seen  (p.  321),  essentially  an  argunienticm 
\  ad  hominem,  professedly  put  as  a  special  plea  to  those  "  who  de- 
sire to  be  under  law"  (Gal.  iv,  21).  Its  exceptional  character  only 
serves  to  set  in  stronger  light  Paul's  constant  habit  elsewhere  of 
construing  the  Scriptures  according  to  the  simple  and  natural  im- 
port of  the  words. 

We  have  already  devoted  a  chapter  to  the  consideration  of  the 
Peter's  use  of  niethod  in  which  the  sacred  writers  quote  from  one  an- 
scripture.  other.'  When  the  New  Testament  writers  adduce  a 
passage  from  the  Old  Testament  they  evidently  assume  that  they 
are  making  use  of  the  oracles  of  C4od,  and  nowhere  can  it  be  shown 
I  that  tliey  put  upon  the  language  quoted  a  farfetched  or  irrelevant 
'idea.  Thus,  for  example,  Peter,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  cites  the 
latter  part  of  Psalm  xvi  (8-11)  according  to  the  Septuagint,  and 
then  proceeds  to  comment  upon  it  (Acts  ii,  25-31).  He  shows,  from  . 
the  obvious  import  of  the  language  of  the  psalmist,  that  it  could  not 
refer  to  David,  but  was  literally  and  amply  fulfilled  in  Jesus  Christ. 
Peter  elsewhere  speaks  of  the  steadfast  prophetic  word,  which  is 
like  a  lamp  shining  in  a  dark  place,  and  declares  that  "no  prophecy 
of  Scripture  is  of  private  interpretation"  (2  Peter  i,  19-21).  It  is 
God's  revelation,  as  the  context  indicates,  and  not  a  private  essay 
on  the  part  of  the  prophet  who  uttered  it  to  set  forth  something  of 
his  own  will.  Nothing  could  be  further  from  Peter's  thought  than 
the  notion  that  the  Scripture  is  a  riddle,  or  that  its  language  may 
be  used  arbitrarily  to  clothe  in  attractive  guise  allegories  and  specu- 
lations which  originate  in  the  will  of  man. 

But  though  the  New  Testament  exhibits  in  itself  the  principles 
Allegorizing?  and  methods  of  a  sound  and  trustworthy  exegesis,  the 
S^posfoHc   ^^'iclely  prevalent  Hellenistic  habit  of  allegorizing  what 
:  age.  seemed  offensive  to  philosophic  taste  carried  along  with 

its  strong  tide  many  of  the  Christian  writers  of  the  post-apostolic 
age.  The  Church  of  this  early  period  Avas  too  much  engaged  in 
Ktruggles  for  life  to  develoj)  an  accurate  or  scientific  interpretation 
of  Scripture.  There  was  great  intellectual  activity,  and  the  early 
forms  of  heresy  which  disturbed  the  Church  develo])ed  by  contro- 
versy great  strength  and  subtlety  of  reasoning.  But  the  tone  and 
style  of  tlie  earlier  writers  were  apologetical  and  polemical  rather 

'  See  above,  pp.  500-510. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  631 

than  exegetical.  Harassed  by  jiersecution,  distracted  by  occasional 
factions,  and  exposed  to  manifold  dangers,  the  early  Christian  prop- 
agandists had  no  opj^ortunities  to  cultivate  those  habits  of  careful 
study  which  lead  to  broad  generalization  and  impartial  decisions. 
In  the  hurry  and  pressure  of  exciting  times  men  take  readily  what 
first  comes  to  hand,  or  serves  an  immediate  purpose,  and  it  was  very 
natural  that  many  of  the  early  Christian  writers  should  make  use 
of  methods  of  Scripture  interpretation  which  were  widely  prevalent' 
at  the  time. 

In  the  writings  of  the  apostolical  fathers  we  observe  a  frequent, 
practical,  and,  in  the  main,  appropriate,  use  of  Scripture.  The  Apostoii- 
The  Epistle  of  Clement  of  Rome  contains  a  great  many  <=^'  Fathers. 
citations  from  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  adduced  for  the  legiti- 
mate  purpose  of  strengthening  practical  counsels  and  exhortations. 
A  few  of  his  quotations  seem  ill  adapted  to  his  purpose,  but  that 
might  be  said  of  many  later  writers  whose  general  principles  of 
exposition  ai-e  unexceptionable.  Rahab's  scarlet  thread  clement  of 
is  said  to  indicate  "  that  redemption  should  flow  through  Rome, 
the  blood  of  the  Lord  to  all  them  that  believe  and  hope  in  God  " 
(chap.  xii).  The  fable  of  the  phoenix  is  also  cited  as  a  veritable 
fact  to  illustrate  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  (chap.  xxv).  But  - 
aside  from  these  two  things  there  is  little  in  this  Clementine  epistle 
that  can  fairly  be  pronounced  farfetched  or  fanciful.  The  so-called 
Second  Epistle  of  Clement,  though  doubtless  of  much  later  date, 
and  of  different  authorship,  is  also  free  from  fanciful  interpretations 
of  Scripture. 

The  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  which  belongs,  probably,  to  the  earlier 
part  of  the  second  century,  is  full  of  mystic  allegoriz- 
ing much  after  the  style  of  Philo.     It  would  seem  to 
have  been  Avritten  by  some  Alexandrian  Christian  who  had  read  the 
works  of  Philo,  or  who  had  imbibed  the  spirit  of  eclecticism  Avhich 
was  so  strong  in  the  great  metropolis  of  Egypt.     His  knowledge  of 
the  Scriptures  was  manifestly  very  imperfect,  and  his  attempts  to 
sj^iritualize  the  statements  of  the  sacred  writers  sometimes  pervert 
the  sense  and  produce  an  absurd  exposition.     He  seems  everywhere  | 
anxious  to  allegorize  or  exjDlain  away  those  parts  of  Scripture  which  | 
enjoin  outward  ordinances,  or  in  any  way  favour  Judaism. 

The  Epistles  of  Ignatius,  the  spurio\is  as  well  as  those  commonly 
•eceived  as  genuine,  contain  very  little  which  can  prop- 
erly be  regarded  as  exposition  of  the  Scriptures.     In 
the  Syriac  version,  in  which  three  of  them  exist,  and  which  Cureton 
and  some  others  regard  as  the  only  genuine  productions  of  Igna- 
tius,  there  is  hardly  a  citation  of  Scripture  to  be  found.      The 


I 


633  HISTORY    OF 

shorter  Greek  recension  contains  numerous  citations  from  the  New 
Testament,  and  a  few  from  the  Old,  which  are  adduced  for  the  pur- 
pose of  enforcing  Christian  counsel  and  exhortation.  The  longer 
Greek  recension  contains  more  quotations  from  the  Old  Testament 
and  a  more  abundant  use  of  Scripture  generally.  The  writer  ap- 
pears peculiarly  anxious  that  those  to  whom  he  wrote  should  honour 
and  obey  their  bishop  and  the  presbytery.  For  he  says  to  the  Ei)he- 
sians,  "  Your  justly  renowned  presbytery,  worthy  of  God,  is  fitted  as 
exactly  to  the  bishop  as  the  strings  are  to  the  harp,"  He  argues 
further  that  "  we  ought  to  receive  every  one  whom  the  Master  of 
the  house  sends  to  be  over  his  household,  as  we  would  do  him  that 
sent  him.  It  is  manifest,  therefore,  that  we  should  look  upon  the 
bishop  ever  as  we  look  upon  the  Lord  himself." '  He  says,  in  an- 
other place,  that  Jesus  Christ  was  "both  the  Son  of  man  and  Son  of 
God,  to  the  end  that  ye  obey  the  bishop  and  the  presbytery  with 
an  undivided  mind,  breaking  one  and  the  same  bread,  which  is  the 
medicine  of  immortality,  and  the  antidote  to  prevent  us  from 
dying."'  He  speaks  of  "being  stones  of  the  temple  of  the  Father, 
prepared  for  the  building  of  God  the  Father,  and  drawn  up  on 
high  by  the  instrument  {iJ,T]xavrig)  of  Jesus  Christ,  which  is  the 
cross,  making  use  of  the  Holy  Spirit  as  a  rope,  while  your  faith 
was  the  means  by  which  you  ascended  (dvayojyevg  vfiibv),  and  your 
love  the  way  which  led  up  to  God."  ^  He  says  that  Jesus  allowed 
the  ointment  to  be  poured  upon  his  head  "  that  he  might  breathe 
immortality  into  the  Church,"^  and  "he  was  born  and  baptized 
that  by  his  passion  he  might  purify  the  water,"  ^  Whoever  the  au- 
thor of  these  Ignatian  epistles,  he  was  a  fanciful  reasoner  and  an 
unsafe  interpreter  of  the  Scriptures. 

The  Epistle  toDiognetus  and  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas,  two  most 
interesting  documents  of  early  Christianity,  usually  pub- 
ApostoUcai  Fa-   lished  with  the  apostolic  fathers,  contain  no  specimens 
*  ^^^'  of  Scrijiture  exegesis,  and  furnish  no  special  help  to 

trace  the  history  of  interpretation.  The  few  remaining  fragments 
of  the  writings  of  Papias  indicate  that  that  ancient  father  was 
somewhat  of  an  expositor,  Eusebius  describes  him  as  "  a  man  well 
skilled  in  all  manner  of  learning,  and  well  acquainted  with  the 
Scriptures,"  but  much  given  to  folloAving  traditions,  and  "  very  lim- 
ited in  his  comprehension."  '  "  The  apostolic  fathers,"  says  Pres- 
sense,^  "  are  to  be  regarded,  not  as  great  writers,  but  as  great 

'  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  chapters  iv  and  vi. 

*Ibi(l.,  cliap.  XX.         ^  Ibid.,  chap.  ix.         *  Ibid.,  chap.  xvii.         '  Ibid.,  chap,  xviii. 

*  Ecclesiastical  History,  book  iii,  chap,  xxxix. 

■>  The  Early  Years  of  Christianity,  pp.  216,  217.     New  York,  1811. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  635 

I 

historical  characters.  They  preserved  the  treasure  of  evangelical 
doctrine  without  themselves  fully  knowing  all  it  contained.  They 
esteemed  it,  nevertheless,  more  highly  than  their  own  life,  Avhich 
they  were  ever  ready  to  lay  down  at  the  call  of  duty.  The  Christ- 
ians of  this  epoch  were  martyrs  in  the  holiest  of  causes,  and  set  a 
sacred  seal  on  the  claims  of  God  by  their  faithfulness  to  the  truth, 
and  on  the  rights  of  man  by  their  resistance  to  all  religious  tyranny. 
The  apostolic  fathers  accept  the  great  principles  laid  dowm  in  the 
previous  period  by  St.  Paul  and  St.  John.  They  never  appeal  to 
the  ceremonial  law  in  opposition  to  the  law  of  Christian  liberty. 
But  since  Judseo-Christianity  was  not  so  much  a  simple  fact  as  the 
embodiment  of  a  principle  and  natural  tendency  of  the  human 
heart,  we  must  not  be  surprised  to  meet  with  it  again  under  new 
forms  in  the  orthodox  Church  at  the  commencement  of  the  second 
century.  The  divergences  of  view  among  these  early  fathers  do 
not  reach  positive  opi^osition.  There  is  no  collision  of  hostile  par- 
ties; no  stormy  discussion  is  raised;  but  there  are,  nevertheless, 
very  distinct  shades  of  doctrine  variously  colouring  the  faith  in 
Christ  which  is  held  in  common  by  all.  On  the  one  hand  we  have 
Pauline  doctrine  represented  by  Clement  of  Rome,  Ignatius,  and 
Polycarp.  The  teaching  of  Polycarp  bears  also  the  distinct  impress 
of  the  spirit  of  St.  John,  whose  immediate  disciple  he  was.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  idealistic  symbolism  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
is  carried  to  the  verge  of  Gnosticism  by  the  author  of  the  epistle 
known  as  that  of  Barnabas.  Lastly,  Papias,  and  the  writer  of  the 
allegory  of  the  Pastor,  revive,  if  not  the  views,  at  least  the  princi- 
ples, of  Judseo-Christianity."  ' 

In  the  writings  of  Justin,   surnamed  the  Philosopher  and  the 

Martyr,  we  have  the  earTTest  extant  apologies  of  the    ,   ,.  „  _^ 

•'    '  — ——  ■'■        °  Justin  Martyr. 

Christian  faith,  and  the  first  elaborate  attempt  to  ex- 
plain the  Old  Testament  Messianic  prophecies  as  fulfilled  in  the 
Christ  of  the  gospels.  His  two  Apologies  and  his  Dialogue  with 
the  Jew  Trypho  were  written  about  the  middle  of  the  second 
century,  and  abound  with  citations  from  the  Scriptures  (generallyji 
from  memory).  Of  many  of  these  citations  he  gives  an  expo-/ 
sition,  especially  texts  which  in  any  way  foretell  or  prefigure  the 
Christ.     In   his  discourse    with  Trypho  (chap,   ii)  he    informs    us 

1  The  latest  and  most  complete  edition  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  is  that  of  Geb- 
hardt,  Harnach,  and  Zahn,  Patrum  Apostolicorum  Opera,  3  vols.  Lps..  1875-77.  In 
grateful  acknowledgment  of  the  services  of  that  distinguished  scholar  they  published 
their  work  as  the  third  edition  of  Dressel,  whose  second  edition  (Lps.,  1863)  had  been 
for  some  time  exhausted,  and  yet  in  great  demand.  An  excellent  English  translation 
by  Roberts,  Donaldson,  and  Crombie  forms  the  first  volume  of  the  Ante-Nicene  Christ- 
ian Library.     Edinb.,  1873. 


€34  HISTORY   07 

of  his  studies  in  the  philosophy  of  the  Stoics,  the  Peripatetics,  the 
Pytliagoreans,  and  the  Platonists,  and  such  was  his  love  for  philo- 
sophical pursuits  that  he  clung  with  tenacity  to  some  of  the  teach- 
ings of  Plato  as  not  essentially  different  from  those  of  Christ.  In 
liis  Second  Apology  he  says  (chap,  xiii) :  "  Each  man  spoke  well  in 
proportion  to  the  share  he  had  of  the  spermatic  word,  seeing  what 
was  related  to  it.  .  .  .  For  all  the  writers  were  able  to  see  realities 
darkly  through  the  sowing  of  the  implanted  word  that  was  in 
them."  But  in  Jesus  Christ  he  finds  the  sura  and  substance  of  all 
philosophy.  "Our  doctrines,"  he  says  (chap,  x),  "appear  to  be 
greater  than  all  human  teaching ;  because  Christ,  who  appeared  for 
our  sakes,  became  the  whole  rational  being,  body  and  reason  and 
soul.  For  whatever  either  lawgivers  or  philosophers  uttered  well 
they  elaborated  by  finding  and  contemplating  some  part  of  the 
Word.  But  since  they  did  not  know  the  whole  of  the  Word,  Avhich 
is  Christ,  they  often  contradicted  themselves."  Justin  was  an  en- 
thusiastic lover  and  fearless  defender  of  Christianity.  He  was  a 
man  of  great  learning,  and  delighted  to  use  his  knowledge  of  Greek 
philosophy  to  illustrate  and  enhance  the  teachings  of  Scripture. 
I  But  his  expositions  are  often  fanciful,  sometimes  almost  silly.  He 
His  fanciful  i*^  notably  Wanting  in  critical  discrimination  and  judg- 
expositions.  ment,  and  carries  the  tyj)ical  interpretation  of  the  Old 
Testament  to  wild  extravagance.  In  a  single  chapter  of  the  Dia- 
logue with  Trypho  (chap,  cxxxiv)  he  says: 

Tlie  marriages  of  Jacob  were  types  of  that  wliicli  Christ  was  about  to 
accomplish.  For  it  was  not  lawful  for  Jacob  to  marry  two  sisters  at  once. 
Being  deceived  in  obtaining  the  younger  he  again  served  seven  years. 
Now,  Leah  is  your  people  and  the  synagogue,  but  Rachel  is  our  Church. 
And  for  tliese,  and  for  tiie  servants  in  both,  Christ  even  now  serves.  For 
while  Noah  gave  to  the  two  sons  the  seed  of  the  third  as  servants,  now, 
on  tlie  other  haiul,  Christ  has  come  to  restore  both  the  free  sons  and 
the  servants  among  them,  conferring  the  same  honour  on  all  of  them  who 
keep  his  commandments.  .  .  .  Jacob  served  Laban  for  speckled  and  many- 
spotted  sheep,  and  Christ  served,  even  to  the  slavery  of  the  cross,  for 
the  various  and  many-formed  races  of  mankind,  acquiring  them  through 
the  blood  and  mystery  of  the  cross.  Leah  was  weak-eyed  ;  for  the  eyes  of 
your  souls  are  excessively  weak.  Rachel  stole  the  gods  of  Laban,  and  has 
hid  them  to  this  day;  and  we  have  lost  our  paternal  and  material  gods. 
Jacob  was  liated  for  all  time  by  his  brother;  and  we  now,  and  our  Lord 
himself,  are  hated  by  you  and  by  all  men,  tliough  we  are  brothers  l)y 
nature.  Jacob  was  called  Israel;  and  Israel  has  been  demonstrated  to  be 
the  Christ,  who  is,  and  is  called  Jesus.' 

'  The  best  edition  of  the  works  of  Justin  is  tliat  of  Otto,  new  edition,  in  3  vols. 
Jena,  1847-50.  An  accurate  Enj^lish  translation  is  given  in  the  second  volume  of  the 
Anto-Niconc  Christian  Library.     Ediub.,  1807. 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION.  635 

In  the  writings  of  TJieophilus  of  Antioch  and  Melito  of  Sardis 
we  discover  a  more  formal  and  systematic  exegesis.  meophUus  and 
Theophilus  comj)osed  commentaries  on  the  Gospels  and  Memo. 
or.  the  Book  of  Proverbs,  in  which,  according  to  Neander,^  we  may 
observe  the  germ  of  that  exegetical  bent  for  Avhich  the  Church  of 
Antioch  became  noted.  His  ajDologetical  work  addressed  to  Au- 
tolycus  is  of  the  same  general  character  as  the  Apologies  of  Justin 
Martyr,  and  contain  some  fanciful  interpretations  of  Scripture ;  but 
he  was  evidently  an  earnest  student  and  distinguished  expounder 
of  the  sacred  writings.'  Melito  appears  to  have  been  especially 
proficient  in  Old  Testament  literature,  and  is  said  by  Eusebius^  to 
have  written  on  the  Passover,  on  the  Prophets,  and  on  the  Revela- 
tion of  John.     Only  a  few  fragments  of  his  works  are  now  extant.* 

But  while  in  the  above-named  writers  we  see  the  dialectic  skill 
and  speculative  tendencies  of  the  Churches  of  Asia  IMinor  and  Syria, 
in  IrensDus,  bishop   of  Lyons,  in  France,  "the  Light  of 

TrPTifPiis 

the  Western  Church,"  we  observe  that  Christian  thought 
was  not  inactive,  nor  without  rich  products,  in  the  churches  of 
Western  Europe.  Irenaeus  passed  his  youth  in  Asia  Minor,  and 
was  a  disciple  of  Polycarp,  who  had  seen  and  talked  with  the 
Apostle  John ;  but  his  removal  to  France,  where,  in  the  latter  part 
of  the  second  century,  he  became  presbyter,  and  afterward  bishop 
of  the  Church  at  Lyons,  has  identified  him  with  the  Western 
Church.  Dorner  pronounces  him  "the  greatest  Church  teacher  of 
the  generation  before  Clement,  and  especially  worthy  of  notice,  be- 
cause he  combines  in  himself  the  different  tendencies  in  the  Church, 
and  brings  them  to  a  harmonious  interpenetration.  Well  versed  in 
Gnostic  and  Church  literature,  fitted  by  the  events  of  his  life  to  be 
a  bond  of  union  between  oriental  and  occidental  Christianity,  he 
had  a  mild,  free,  and  open  feeling  for  what  was  true  in  all  the  often 
mutually  exclusive  parties;  and  the  deeper  he  penetrated  scientifi- 
cally and  practically  into  the  essence  of  Christianity,  with  so  much 
firmer  a  hand  could  he  unite  what  was  cognate  and  mutually  at- 
tractive, and  eliminate  what  was  abnormal.  No  one  in  the  second 
century  represents  as  he  does  the  purity  and  the  fulness  of  the 

^  General  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church.  Torrey'a  translation, 
vol.  i,  p.  6Y4. 

'^  The  second  and  third  books  of  his  Apology  contain  large  extracts  from  the  firj^t 
part  of  Genesis,  with  comments  upon  them.  See  English  translation  in  vol.  iii  of  tlie 
Edinburgh  Ante-Nicene  Christian  Library. 

'  Ecclesiastical  History,  book  iv,  chap.  xxvi. 

*  The  best  collection  of  these  fragments  is  by  Routh,  Reliquiae  Sacrae.  Oxford, 
1814.  Several  have  been  published  in  the  Journal  of  Sacred  Literature,  vols,  xv,  xvi, 
and  xvii. 


636  HISTORY  OF 

(lovelopraent  within  the  Church;  scarcely  any  one  in  the  Church  of 
his  time  is  so  highly  esteemed  as  he." ' 

The  principal  work  of  Ii-enaeus  consists  of  five  books,  entitled 
Refutation  and  Subversion  of  Knowledge  Falsely  So-called.  The 
more  common  title  is  simply  Against  Heresies.  It  is  the  chief 
storehouse  of  our  information  respecting  the  Gnostic  heresies  of 
that  age,  especially  the  Valentinian  system.  The  work  is  a  great 
polemico-theological  treatise,  ably  defending  the  doctrines  of  the 
Church,  and,  in  the  last  three  books,  dealing  largely  with  Scriptui'e 
exjjosition.  These  expositions  are  sometimes  manifestly  erroneous, 
and  occasionally  farfetched  and  sti'ange,  but  on  the  whole  evince  a 
thorough  acquaintance  with  the  sacred  books,  and  avoid  the  most 
objectionable  features  of  the  typical  and  allegorical  interpretations 
so  prevalent  at  that  time.  Irenwus'  early  training,  and  his  devo- 
tion to  the  memory  of  the  apostolic  fathers,  led  him  to  place  over- 
much confidence  in  tradition  and  the  authority  of  the  Church.^ 

It  is  evident  from  a  careful  study  of  the  above-named  repre- 
No  settled  or  sentatives  of  the  earlier  patristic  exegesis,  that  during 
uniform  her-  the  second  century  of  our  era  there  was  no  uniform  or 
the  second cen-  Settled  method  of  interpreting  the  Scriptures.  Contro- 
tury.  versy  and  heresy  prevailed  even  in  the  midst  of  bitter 

persecution.  The  converts  from  heathenism  who  became  apologists 
and  defenders  of  the  Christian  faith  had  no  acquaintance  with  the 
original  Hebrew  Scriptures,  and  no  occasion  or  inducement  to  culti- 
vate a  scientific  hermeneutics.  Jewish  exegesis  at  that  time  was, 
as  we  have  seen,  utterly  destitute  of  rational  and  self-consistent 
method.  Ebionism  and  Gnosticism  affected  to  some  extent  all 
Christian  thought,  and  it  is  not  difticult  to  understand  how,  under 
such  circumstances,  no  well-defined  principles  of  Scripture  exposi- 
tion were  anywhere  recognised  or  applied.  Some  of  these  early 
fathers  exhibit  a  commendable  moderation  and  judgment  in  the  use 
of  Scripture  texts,  while  others  load  them  with  fanciful  and  even 
puerile  notions  of  their  own.' 

'  History  of  the  Development  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Person  of  Christ.  Eng.  trans., 
vol.  i,  p.  303.     Edinb.,  1861. 

-  Tiic  best  edition  of  Irenteus  is  that  of  Harvey,  S.  Irenaei  Episcopi  Lugdunensis 
libri  ciuinque  adversus  Haereses.  2  vols.  Cambridge,  1857.  Eng.  trans,  by  Roberts 
and  Kambaut  in  vols,  v  and  ix  of  the  Edinburgh  Ante-Nicene  Christian  Library. 

^  Hence  we  should  exercise  great  care  in  making  an  appeal  to  the  antiquity  of  an 
opinion  or  an  interpretation.  Modern  niillenarians  are  wont  to  claim  tliat  Chiliasm 
was  the  universal  faith  of  the  early  Church.  Thus  West,  in  the  Pre-Millonnial  Essays 
of  tlie  Prophetic  Conference,  p.  332  (New  York,  1870):  "Chiliasm  was  the  common 
iiilieritance  of  hotli  .Jewish  and  (Jentile  Cliristians,  and  passed  from  the  Jcwisli  Christ- 
ian to  tlie  (n-iililc  Christian  Church  precisely  in  the  way  the  Gospel  passed.     It  was 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION.  637 


CHAPTER  IV. 

LATER    PATRISTIC    EXEGESIS. 

The  history  of  biblical  interpretation  was  notably  influenced  after 
the  beginning  of  the  third  century  by  the  famous  schools  of  Alex- 
andria and  Antioch.  We  have  seen  how,  long  before  school  of  Aiex- 
the  time  of  Christ,  Alexandria  had  become  the  home  of  andria. 
letters.  Thither  learned  men  from  all  parts  of  the  world  resorted 
for  studious  inquiry.  The  Asiatic  mystic,  the  Jewish  rabbi,  and 
the  Greek  and  Roman  philosopher  there  came  together  and  inter- 
changed their  thoughts.  "Born  of  this  heterogeneous  union,"  says 
Pressense,  "the  Alexandrian  mind  rose  above  all  national  diver- 
gences; but  it  also  rose  above  reality,  above  history,  to  the  cloudy 
summits  of  speculation,  and  it  was  utterly  wanting  in  the  historic 
sense.  Strong  in  its  allegorical  method,  it  sported  with  facts ;  and 
its  philosophical  theories  were  at  once  aspiring  and  unsubstantial."  ^ 
A  school  of  sacred  learning,  such  as  Eusebius  says  had  been  estab- 
lished there  from  ancient  times,'  would  of  necessity  partake  largely 
of  the  eclectic  and  speculative  spirit  of  the  place,  and  we  do  not 

fragrant  at  Antioch  as  at  Jerusalem,  at  Rome  as  at  Ephesus.  History  has  no  con- 
sensus more  unanimous  for  any  doctrine  than  is  the  consensus  of  the  apostolic  fathers 
for  the  pre-millennial  advent  of  Christ."  This  sweeping  statement  is  based  upon  ex 
parte  testimony.  Hagenbach,  on  the  contrary,  avers  that  in  the  writings  of  Clement 
of  Rome,  Ignatius,  Polycarp,  Tatian,  Athenagoras,  and  Theophilus  of  Antioch  no  mil- 
lenarian  notions  appear.  See  his  History  of  Doctrines,  vol.  i,  p.  215  (New  York,  1861). 
The  fact  is  that  some  of  these  fathers  have  been  quoted  in  favour  of  views  which 
their  language  will  not  warrant,  and  while  Papias,  Justin,  Irensus,  and  some  others 
are  pronounced  Chiliasts,  an  equal  or  greater  number  can  be  cited  who  give  no  sanc- 
tion to  such  views.  The  first  Chiliasts,  moreover,  sometimes  present  their  views  in 
connexion  with  expositions  of  Scripture  which  are  utterly  untenable  (as,  for  example, 
Irenaeus  Against  Heresies,  book  v,  chaps,  xxxii-xxxvi).  To  assume,  from  the  silence 
of  any  of  the  fathers,  that  they  accepted  the  Chiliastic  views  is  most  absurd,  especially 
in  view  of  what  Eusebius  says  of  Papias  (Eccl.  History,  iii,  39):  "He  says  that  there 
would  be  a  certain  millennium  after  the  resurrection  and  a  corporeal  reign  of  Christ 
on  this  very  earth ;  which  things  he  appears  to  have  imagined,  as  if  they  were  author- 
ized by  the  apostolic  narrations,  not  understanding  correctly  those  matters  which  they 
propounded  mystically  in  their  representations.  For  he  was  very  limited  in  his  com- 
prehension, as  is  evident  from  his  discourses.  Yet  he  was  the  cause  why  most  of  the 
ecclesiastical  writers,  urging  the  antiquity  of  the  man,  were  carried  away  by  a  similar 
opinion;  as,  for  instance,  Irenaeus,  or  any  other  that  adopted  such  sentiments." 

'  Early  Years  of  Christianity,  p.  266.  '  Ecclesiastical  History,  book  v,  chap.  x. 


638  HISTORY  OF 

wonder  that  the  great  liglits  of  the  Alexandrian  Church  were  not- 
ably given  to  allegorical  expositions  of  the  Scriptures. 

lyie  first  great  teacher  of  the  Alexandrian  school,  whose  works 
ciomens  Alex-  li^^^'^  come  dowu  to  US,  is  Titus  Flavius  Clement.  He 
andrinus.  -^^ -j^g  preceded  by  Pantffinus,  and  jjerhaps  Athenagoras,' 

and  others,  who,  like  Apollos  of  apostolic  times,  had  profited  by 
Alexandrian  culture,  and  were  "mighty  in  the  Scriptures"  (Acts 
xviii,  24).  Clement  was  privileged,  as  he  tells  us,  to  travel  exten- 
sively, and  listen  to  the  teachings  of  various  learned  men  from 
Greece,  Syria,  Palestine,  and  the  East,  but  he  at  last  found  in 
Egypt  the  man  who  gave  him  rest.  "  He,  the  true,  the  Sicilian  bee, 
gathering  the  spoil  of  the  flowers  of  the  prophetic  and  apostolic 
meadow,  engendered  in  the  souls  of  his  hearers  a  deathless  element 
of  knowledge."'  The  one  here  referred  to  is  believed  to  have  been 
Panta?nus,  the  distinguished  Christian  philosopher,  whom  Clement 
succeeded  as  head  of  the  Alexandrian  school,  and  who,  according 
to  Eusebius,  commented,  both  orally  and  in  writing,  on  the  treas- 
ures of  divine  truth.^  The  disciple  was  worthy  of  his  master,  and 
his  works  evince  prodigious  learning,  and  could  scarcely  have  been 
composed  anywhere  but  within  easy  access  to  the  famous  library  of 
the  Egyptian  metropolis.  He  is  said  to  have  written  commentaries 
on  several  books  of  Scripture,  but  only  three  great  works  of  his  are 
still  extant,  namely.  The  Exhortation  to  the  Greeks,  The  Instructor 
(or  Pedagogue),  and  The  Miscellanies  (Stromata).  These  three 
works  form  a  well-related  series,  and  their  great  aim  is  to  expose 
the  follies  and  absurdities  of  heathenism,  and  extol  the  word  and 
wisdom  of  God. 

But  Clement  is  a  fanciful  interpreter.  Deeply  read  in  the  works 
,     ^.,     of  Philo  Juda^us,  he  adopted  his  allegorical  methods. 

Clement  a  phil-  _        '  _       i  _» 

osophicai  alio-  He  was  fascinated  with  heathen  philosophy.  "  The 
Ronst.  Greek  preparatory  culture,"  he  says,  "  M'ith  philosophy 

itself  came  down  from  God  to  men,  not  with  a  definite  direction, 
but  in  the  way  in  which  showers  fall  down  on  the  good  land,  and 
on  the  dunghill,  and  on  the  houses."  "  And  by  philoso))hy,"  he 
adds,  "  I  do  not  mean  the  Stoic,  or  the  Platonic,  or  the  Epicurean, 
or  the  Aristotelian,  but  whatever  has  been  well  said  l)y  each  of 
these  sects  which  teach  righteousness  along  with  a  science  pervaded 
by  piety — this  eclectic  whole  I  call  philosophy."^  But  in  the  Son 
of  God,  the  eternal  Word,  he  recognised  and  worshipped  the  sura 

'  Sec  Emerson,  On  the  Catcelictical  School,  or  Theolof^ical  Seminary,  at  Alexandria 
in  Ejrypt.     Amcriean  Hihlical  Rei)ository  for  Jan.,  1834,  p.  25. 
°  The  Jtiseellanies  (Stromata),  book  i,  eha|).  i. 
*  Ecclesiaslieal  ilistory,  book  v,  chap.  x.  ■*  Miscellanies,  book  i,  cliaj).  vii. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  639 

and  substance  of  all  true  philosophy,  and  he  holds  that  the  utmost 
perfection  of  the  logical  faculty  is  necessary  to  expound  the  three- 
fold sense  of  the  law,  the  mystic,  the  moral,  and  the  prophetic' 
"  For  many  reasons,"  he  argues,  "  the  Scriptures  hide  the  sense. 
First,  that  we  may  become  inquisitive,  and  be  ever  on  the  watch 
for  the  discovery  of  the  words  of  salvation.  Then  it  was  not  suit- 
able for  all  to  understand,  so  that  they  might  not  receive  harm  in 
consequence  of  taking  in  another  sense  the  things  declared  for  sal- 
vation by  the  Holy  Spirit.  Wherefore  the  holy  mysteries  of  the 
prophecies  are  veiled  in  parables."  " 

Clement  Avas  succeeded,  at  Alexandria,  by  a  pupil  even  greater 
than  himself,  a  man  of  the  purest  character,  who,  while 
yet  a  little  child,  disclosed  a  remarkable  insight  into  "^^°" 

the  depth  and  fulness  of  the  Scriptures,  and  later,  by  his  untiring 
devotion  to  multifarious  studies,  his  unremitting  labours  by  night 
and  by  day,  and  his  indomitable  firmness  through  all  temptation  and 
persecution,  acquired  the  name  of  Man  of  Adamant  (Adamant inus). 
Notwithstanding  his  questionable  methods  of  interpretation,  and 
not  infrequent  errors,  Origen  was  the  greatest  biblical  critic  and 
exegete  of  the  ancient  Church.  Jerome,  who  violently  opposed 
some  of  his  views,  pronounced  him  the  greatest  teacher  since  the 
days  of  the  ajDOstles,  "  a  man  of  immortal  genius,  Avho  understood 
logic,  geometry,  arithmetic,  music,  grammar,  rhetoric,  and  all  the 
sects  of  the  philosophers,  so  that  he  was  resorted  to  by  many  stu- 
dents of  secular  literature  whom  he  received  chieflv  that  he  miofht 
embrace  the  opportunity  of  instructing  them  in  the  faith  of  Christ."  ^ 
He  practiced  the  most  rigid  asceticism,  refused  the  gifts  of  admir- 
ing friends  and  pupils,  and  after  devoting  the  day  to  teaching  and 

'  Miscellanies,  book  i,  chap,  xxviii.  He  does  not  deny  the  natural  or  literal  sense, 
but  often  makes  use  of  it,  so  that  he  really  held  to  a  fourfold  sense  of  Scripture. 

^  Ibid.,  book  vi,  chap.  xv.  The  following  comment  on  Gen.  xxii,  3,  4,  will  illus- 
trate the  jnystico-allegorical  style  in  which  this  writer  treats  the  sacred  narratives : 
"  Abraham,  when  he  came  to  the  place  which  Grod  told  him  of  on  the  third  day, 
looking  up,  saw  the  place  afar  off.  For  the  first  day  is  that  which  is  constituted  by 
the  sight  of  good  things ;  and  the  second  is  the  soul's  best  desire ;  on  the  third  the 
mind  perceives  spiritual  things,  the  eyes  of  the  understanding  being  opened  by  the 
Teacher  who  rose  on  the  third  day.  The  three  days  may  be  the  mystery  of  the  seal  (bap- 
tism) in  which  God  is  really  believed.  It  is,  consequently,  afar  off  that  he  perceives 
the  [ilace.  For  the  reign  of  God  is  hard  to  attain,  which  Plato  calls  the  reign  of 
ideas,  having  learned  from  Moses  that  it  was  a  place  which  contained  all  things  uni- 
versally. But  it  is  seen  by  Abraham  afar  oif,  rightly,  because  of  his  lieing  in  the 
realms  of  generation,  and  he  is  forthwith  initiated  by  the  angel.  Thence  says  the 
apostle,  '  Now  we  see  through  a  glass,  but  then  face  to  face,'  by  those  sole  pure  and 
incorporeal  applications  of  tlie  intelltjct." — Ibid.,  book  v,  chap.  xi. 

^  Liber  de  viris  illustribus,  chap.  liv. 


640  HISTORY   OF 

pious  labours,  he  was  wont  to  spend  the  greater  part  of  the  night 
in  the  study  of  the  Scriptures,  and  when  he  slept  he  chose  the  bare 
floor  for  his  couch.  He  even  mutilated  himself  that  he  might  be  a 
€unuch  for  the  sake  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Such  a  man  would 
be  likely  to  fall  in  with  some  of  the  superstitions  of  his  age,  and  we 
•do  not  wonder  that  he  studied  Hebrew,  not  merely  for  its  practical 
use  in  meeting  Jewish  opponents,  but  with  a  notion  that  it  was  the 
original  language  of  mankind,  and  was  destined  to  become  the  uni- 
versal language.  Though  rejecting  personal  gifts,  there  was  one 
favour  offered  him  by  his  admiring  friend,  Ambrose,  whom  he  had 
converted  from  Gnostic  heresy,  which  he  felt  not  at  liberty  to  de- 
cline. This  wealthy  benefactor  furnished  Origen  with  ample  means 
for  the  prosecution  of  his  studies  and  the  publication  of  his  works 
by  placing  at  his  command  seven  secretaries  to  write  at  his  dicta- 
tion, and  as  many  copyists,  skilled  in  caligraphy,  to  transcribe  fair 
cojDies  of  what  the  others  hastily  took  down  from  the  lips  of  the 
master.  In  this  way  Origen  was  enabled  to  publish  a  vast  number 
of  works — some  say  over  six  thousand — most  of  which  are  lost. 
The  first  notable  attempt  at  textual  criticism  may  be  traced  to 

Oriaren's  ijreat  work,  the  Hexapla.     His  veneration  for 
TheHexapla.        ,     ^,      .  ,-,-,■  •^  ^  •      i        i 

the  Scriptures  led  him  to  ascribe  a  sort  oi  magical  value 

to  the  original  text,  and  he  sought  to  establish  it  by  the  widest  pos- 
sible collation  and  comparison.  He  arranged  in  six  parallel  col- 
umns the  Hebrew  text,  a  Greek  transliteration  of  the  same,  the  text 
of  the  Septuagint,  and  the  Greek  versions  of  Aquila,  Symmachus,  and 
Theodotion.  Some  pages,  which  contained  books  of  which  other 
Greek  versions  were  extant,  were  arranged  with  seven,  eight,  or 
nine  columns,  according  to  the  number  of  different  versions.  On 
this  immense  work,  which  extended  to  nearly  fifty  volumes,  he  was 
engaged  for  twenty-eight  years.^  He  also  prepared  the  Tetrapla, 
Avhich  presented  in  four  columns  the  Septuagint,  and  the  versions 
of  Aquihi,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion. 

The  exegetical  works  of  Origen  comprised  brief  Scholia  on  the 
Oriiren's  exe-  niore  difficult  texts,  and  also  extended  commentaries 
sreticai  works,  ^j^^  homilies  on  most  of  the  Bible,  considerable  por- 
tions of  which  are  still  extant.  He  also  composed  several  apologet- 
icfil  and  dogmatical  works,  the  most  important  of  which  are  the 
Treatise  against  Celsus  and  the  De  Principiis.  But  with  all  his  de- 
votion to  the  interests  of  truth,  and  the  enormous  magnitude  of  his 

'  Tlie  remains  of  this  great  work  were  collected  and  published  in  two  folio  volumes 
by  Montfaucon,  Paris,  1713.  Revised  editii)n  by  Ralinlt,  Lpz.,  1769-70,  2  vols.  8vo. 
It  is  also  piil)lislK'd  in  vols,  xv  and  xvi  of  Milne's  iiiook  Tatrologia;  Cursus  Conipletus, 
and  in  two  line  (luartos  by  Field,  Oxford,  1875. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  641 

labours,  he  was  a  mystico-allegorical  exegete.  He  followed  in  the 
path  of  Philo  the"  Jew,  and  Clement  the  Christian,  and,  assuming 
that  many  portions  of  the  Scriptures  are  unreasonable  and  absurd 
when  taken  literally,  he  maintained  a  threefold  sense,  the  corporeal, 
the  psychical,  and  the  spiritual.'  But  he  protests  against  being 
supposed  to  teach  that  no  history  is  real,  and  no  law  to  be  literally 
observed,  because  some  narratives  and  laws,  literally  understood, 
are  absurd  or  impossible.  "  For,"  he  says,  "  the  passages  that  are 
true  in  their  historical  sense  are  much  more  numerous  than  those 
which  have  a  purely  spiritual  signification."  ^ 

The  wonderful  influence  of  Origan  is  to  be  explained  mainly  by 
the  grandeur  of  his  character,  his  immense  learning,  his  innuence  of 
fortitude  under  persecution,  and  the  enthusiasm  with  Origen. 
which  he  performed  everything  he  took  in  hand.  Driven  by  perse- 
cution from  Alexandria,  he  resorted  to  Csesarea,  in  Palestine,  and 
there  established  a  school  which  for  a  time  surpassed  that  of  the 
Egyptian  metropolis.  The  magnetism  of  his  person,  and  his  wide- 
spread fame  as  an  expounder  of  the  Scriptures,  attracted  great  mul- 
titudes to  him.  His  pernicious  habit  of  explaining  the  sacred 
records  as  the  Platonists  explained  the  heathen  myths,  and  his 
heretical  views  touching  the  pre-existence  of  souls,  a  new  probation 
after  death,  and  some  other  doctrines,  were  so  far  offset  by  his 
pure  zeal  for  God,  and  his  many  and  great  virtues,  that  he  has  been 
quite  generally  arknowledged  as  pre-eminently  the  father  of  bibli- 
cal science,  and  one  of  the  greatest  prodigies  of  learning  and  indus- 
trv  among  men.^ 

'  "  The  way,  as  it  appears  to  us,"  says  Origen,  "  in  which  we  ought  to  deal  with  the 
Scriptures,  and  extract  from  them  their  meaning,  is  the  following,  which  has  been 
ascertained  from  the  Scriptures  themselves.  By  Solomon  in  the  Proverbs  (chap,  xxii, 
20,  21)  we  find  some  such  rule  as  this  enjoined  respecting  the  divine  doctrines  of 
Scripture :  '  And  do  thou  portray  them  in  a  threefold  manner,  in  counsel  and  knowl- 
edge, to  answer  words  of  truth  to  them  who  propose  them  to  thee '  [so  Septuagint 
and  Vulgate].  The  individual  ought,  then,  to  portray  the  ideas  of  Holy  Scripture  in 
a  threefold  manner  upon  his  own  soul ;  in  order  that  the  sinful  man  may  be  edified 
by  the  flesh,  as  it  were,  of  the  Scripture,  for  so  we  name  the  obvious  sense ;  while  he 
who  has  ascended  a  certain  way  may  be  edified  by  the  soul,  as  it  were.  The  perfect 
man,  again,  and  he  who  resembles  those  spoken  of  by  the  apostle  when  he  says,  '  we 
speak  wisdom  among  them  that  are  perfect,  but  not  the  wisdom  of  the  world,  nor  of 
the  rulers  of  this  world,  who  come  to  naught,  but  we  speak  the  wisdom  of  God  in  a 
mystery,  the  hidden  wisdom  which  God  ordained  before  the  ages,  unto  our  glory' 
(1  Cor.  ii,  6,  1),  may  be  edified  by  the  spiritual  law, -which  has  a  shadow  of  good 
things  to  come.  For,  as  man  consists  of  body  and  soul  and  spirit,  so  in  the  same 
way  does  Scripture,  which  has  been  arranged  to  be  given  by  God  for  the  salvation  of 
anen." — De  Principiis,  book  iv,  chap,  i,  11. 

'^  Do  Principiis,  book  iv,  chap,  i,  11. 

^  Origen's  works  have  been  printed  in  many  editions.  The  best  is  that  of  the 
41 


642  HISTORY    OF 

Origen's  name  so  far  eclipsed  that  of  all  other  teachers  of  the 
Dionysius  of  Alexandrian  school  that  there  are  few  others  wlio  call 
Alexandria.  fQj.  special  mention.  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  one  of 
Origen's  pupils,  acquired  some  fame  as  an  interpreter.  His  work 
on  the  Promises,  fragments  of  which  are  preserved  in  Eusebius,' 
appears  to  have  been  written  against  Nepos,  an  Egyptian  bishop, 
who  had  published  a  Refutation  of  the  Allegorists,  and  maintained 
therein,  by  a  literal  interpretation  of  John's  Apocalypse,  the  Chili- 
astic  doctrine  of  a  temporal  reign  of  Christ  on  earth.  Dionysius 
refers  to  the  fact  that  some,  before  his  time,  had  rejected  the  Book 
of  Revelation  as  the  work  of  a  Cerinthian  heretic,  but  he  accepts  it 
as  the  work  of  an  inspired  man,  though  not  the  Apostle  John,  the 
son  of  Zebedee.  He  confesses  his  inability  to  understand  it,  but 
regards  it  as  containing  a  hidden  and  wonderful  meaning.  Dionys- 
ius wrote  also  many  epistles  to  leading  ecclesiastics  of  his  day,  and 
commentaries  on  Ecclesiastes,  Luke,  and  John,  fragments  of  which 
are  still  extant.^  He  appears  to  have  been  less  given  to  allegoriz- 
m<x  than  his  distinguished  master. 

Pierius,  who  took  charge  of  the  school  at  Alexandria  at  the  death 

of  Dionysius,  is  said  to  have  given  Origen  much  assist- 
Pienus,    Peter  J  '  &  o 

Martyr,  and  ance  in  his  Critical  labours,  and  also  to  have  written 
Hesychius.  twelve  books  of  commentary,  and  other  works,  all  of 
which  have  perished.  Peter  Martyr,  who  was  bishop  of  Alexandria 
at  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century,  is  described  by  Eusebitis  as 
a  man  of  wonderful  ability  as  a  teacher  of  the  Christian  faith,  and 
distinguished  alike  for  the  excellence  of  his  life  and  his  study  of 
the  sacred  Scriptures.'  Hesychius,  another  Egyptian  bishop,  who 
suffered  martyrdom  about  A.  D.  311,  is  said  to  have  revised  the 
text  of  the  Scptuagint,  and  to  have  also  published  an  edition  of 
the  New  Testament. 

The  school  of  Caesarea,  in  Palestine,  owed  its  notoriety  to  Ori- 
schooi  of  Cffis-  gen,  who  made  that  place  his  home  when  driven  by  per- 
area.  sccution   from   Alexandria.      Many  young   men    there 

gathered  around  him,  imbibed  his  enthusiastic  devotion  to  the  study 
of  the  Scri})tui-es,  and  went  out  from  thence  to  preach  and  teach  in 

Benedictines  De  la  Rue,  Paris,  1733-59,  4  vols.  fol.  It  is  reprinted  in  Migne's  Greek 
I'atrologiaB  Cursus  Conipletus,  Taris,  9  vols.  English  translations  of  the  De  Prin- 
<>ipiis,  the  Contra  Cclsuni,  and  several  of  his  epistles  are  given  ia  vols,  x  and  x.xiii  of 
the  Edinburgh  Ante-Nicene  Christian  Library. 

'  See  Ecclesiastical  History,  book  vii,  chaps,  xxiv,  xxv. 

"  The  extant  fragments  of  Dionysius'  works  are  published  in  all  the  large  collections 
of  the  Fathers,  and  an  English  translation  is  given  in  vol.  xx  of  the  Edinburgh  Aute- 
Isiccne  Cliristiaii  I/iliraiy. 

*  Ecclesiastical  History,  book  viii,  chap.  xiii. ;  book  ix,  chap.  vi. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  643 

various  cities  of  the  East.  The  most  distinguished  disciple  of  this 
school  was  Gregory,  bishop  of  Neo-Csesarea,  in  Pontus,  commonly 
known  as  Gregory  Thaumaturgus.  He  w^as  the  author  of  a  Meta- 
phrase on  Ecclesiastes,  a  work  of  some  merit,  which  is  Gregory  Thau- 
still  extant.  His  Panegyric  on  Origen,  one  of  the  ear-  maturgus. 
liest  productions  of  its  kind  among  Christians,  is  pronounced  by 
Dupin  one  of  the  finest  pieces  of  rhetoi'ic  in  all  antiquity.'  Later 
names,  which  must  ever  shed  lustre  on  Ca^sarea,  are  those  of  Pam- 
j^hihis  and  Eusebius.  The  former  of  these  Neander  describes  as 
"  a  man  distinguished  for  his  zeal  in  the  cause  of  piety  and  science. 
He  founded  at  Cajsarea  an  ecclesiastical  library,  which 

.,  T    .  n     T  1        p        T  r-  Pamphilus. 

contributed  in  no  small  degree  to  the  furtherance  of 
scientific  studies,  even  in  the  fourth  century.  Every  friend  of  sci- 
ence, and  in  particular  every  one  who  was  disposed  to  engage  in  a 
thorough  study  of  the  Bible,  found  in  him  all  possible  encourage- 
ment and  support.  He  exerted  himself  to  multiply,  to  disseminate, 
and  to  correct  the  copies  of  the  Bible.  Many  of  these  copies  he 
distributed  as  presents,  sometimes  to  women  whom  he  saw  much 
occupied  in  reading  the  Scriptures.  He  founded  a  theological 
school  in  which  the  study  of  the  sacred  writings  was  made  a  special 
object  of  attention."  ^ 

Eusebius  of  Caesarea,  the  devoted  friend  of  Pamphilus,  on  ac- 
count of  which  he  is  often  called  Eusebius  Pamphilus,  Eusebius  of 
is  distinguished  as  the  father  of  Church  history  rather  Cassarea. 
than  as  an  exegete.  His  two  great  apologetical  productions,  the 
Prreparatio  Evangelica  and  the  Demonstratio  Evangelica,  are  also 
of  great  value  to  the  Christian  scholar.  Books  iii-x  of  the  last- 
named  work  contain  comments  on  the  Messianic  prophecies,  and 
four  books  of  his  allegorical  interpretations  of  these  prophecies  are 
extant  under  the  title  of  Prophetical  Eclogues.  His  Onomasticon 
is  a  valuable  topographical  and  alphabetical  index  of  the  names  of 
places  mentioned  in  the  Scriptures.  He  wrote  commentaries  on 
the  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Canticles,  Isaiah,  and  Daniel,  and  various 
dissertations  on  the  gospels.  As  an  interpreter  he  followed  in  the 
main  the  allegorical  method  of  Origen,  for  whose  writings  he  had 
a  glowing  admiration.^ 

'  The  extant  works  of  Gregory  Thaumaturgus  have  been  published  in  many  editions ; 
the  best  is  probably  that  of  Migne,  in  vol.  x  of  his  Greek  Patrologiae  Cursus  Com- 
pletus.    English  translation  in  vol.  xx  of  the  Edinburgh  Ante-Nicene  Christian  Library. 

'^  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,  Torrey's  translation,  volume  i, 
p.  72L 

'  The  most  complete  edition  of  Eusebius'  works  is  that  of  Migne,  Greek  Patrologiae 
Cursus  Completus,  vols,  xix-xxiv. 


644  HISTORY   OF 

The  last  considerable  representative  of  the  Alexandrian  school  of 
Cyril  of  Alex-  theology  and  exegesis  was  Cyril,  who  flourished  in  the 
andria.  flj-gt  half  of  the  fifth  century.     He  was  noted  as  a  vio- 

lent and  ambitious  man,  and  too  much  given  to  oppose  and  perse- 
cute those  who  differed  from  him  to  be  a  safe  and  judicious  expos- 
itor. Nevertheless,  he  was  a  man  of  extensive  learning  and  of 
vigorous  mind,  and  is  the  author  of  numerous  dogmatical  and  exe- 
getical  works  which  are  still  extant.  His  commentaries  are  upon 
the  Pentateuch,  Isaiah,  the  twelve  Minor  Prophets,  and  the  Gospels 
of  Luke  and  John.  He  does  not  ignore  or  reject  the  historical 
sense,  but  is  addicted  to  allegorizing,  and  illustrates  how  the  Scrip- 
tures may  be  tortured  to  mean  almost  anything.  He  finds  the 
mystery  of  Christ  set  forth  typically  or  enigmatically  throughout 
the  entire  Old  Testament,  and  carries  a  most  extravagant  system 
of  allegorizing  even  into  the  narratives  of  the  gospels.  For  exam- 
ple, the  five  loaves  in  John  vi,  9,  are  made  to  represent  the  five 
books  of  Moses,  as  a  comparatively  coarse  food,  and  the  two  fishes 
denote  the  finer  and  more  luxurious  nourishment  of  the  teachings 
of  Christ. > 

To  Antioch,  where  the  disciples  were  first  called  Christians  (Acts 
The  School  of  ^ij  26),  belongs  the  honour  of  introducing  a  more  scien- 
Antioch.  ^jgg  and  profitable  system  of  biblical  study.     About  the 

beginning  of  the  fourth  century  there  was  established  at  this  place  a 
school  which  opposed  to  the  Alexandrian  allegorical  exegesis  the 
historico-critical  method  of  interpretation.  We  have  already  made 
note  of  Ignatius  and  Theophilus,  whose  labours  and  influence  gave 
renown  to  that  Syrian  city,  but  they  founded  no  school,  and  ac- 
quired no  great  fame  as  exegetes.  In  his  spirit  and  method  Julius 
Africanus,  of  Nicopolis  (Emmaus)  in  Palestine,  was  a  forerunner  of 
the  Antiochian  school  of  historical  criticism.  His  brief  letter  to 
Origen,  still  extant,  in  which  he  disputes  the  authenticity  of  the 
apocryphal  history  of  Susannah,  exhibits  him  as  more 
than  a  match  for  the  great  Alexandrian  scholar.  For 
he  displays  a  critical  penetration  and  judgment,  a  freedom  from 
ecclesiastical  traditions,  and  an  incisive  way  of  stating  his  views 
which  make  his  short  epistle  more  weighty  and  convincing  than 
the  elaborate  reply  of  Origen.*^  His  letter  to  Aristides  on  the 
genealogies  of  Matthew  and  Luke,  a  part  of  which  is  preserved  in 

'The  most  convenient  edition  of  Cyril's  works  is  that  of  Mij;;nc,  Greol<  Patidlo^^ia; 
Ciirsus  Complctus,  vols.  Ixviii-lxxvii.  An  English  translation  of  his  Commentary  on 
Luke,  iiy  R.  P.  Smith,  was  published  at  Oxford,  1859. 

'  See  Ai'rleanus'  letter  and  Origen's  reply  translated  into  English  in  vol.  x  of  the 
Edinbiugh  Ante-Xieene  Christian  Library. 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION.  645 

Eusebius  (see  above,  i^.  522),  is  another  evidence  of  his  exegetical 
skill.  He  was  also  the  author  of  a  valuable  chronological  work 
eiititleii  Pentabiblos,  from  its  being  arranged  in  five  sections,  of 
which  only  fragments  remain.  Some  affirm  that  he  wrote  a  com- 
mentary on  the  New  Testament,  but  this  is  doubtful.' 

About  A.  D.   290   there  flourished  at   Antioch  a  distinguished 

presbyter,  named  Doi'otheus,  of  whom  Eusebius  says: 

^TT  f   ^  ■  -,    ^^  1  Dorotheas. 

"  He  was  a  man  oi  fine  taste  m  sacred  literature,  and 

was  much  devoted  to  the  study  of  the  Hebrew  language,  so  that  he 
read  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  with  great  facility.  He  M^as  also  of  a 
very  liberal  mind,  and  not  unacquainted  with  the  preparatory 
studies  pursued  among  the  Greeks,  but  in  other  respects  a  eunuch 
by  nature,  having  been  such  from  his  birth;  so  that  the  emperor,  on 
this  account,  as  if  it  were  a  great  miracle,  received  him  into  his 
house  and  family,  and  honoured  him  with  an  appointment  over  the 
purple  dye  establishment  of  Tyre.  Him  we  have  heard  in  the 
Church  expounding  the  Scriptures  with  great  judgment."  ^  It  does 
not  appear  that  Dorotheus  left  any  writings,  but  his  oral  teaching 
imparted  the  true  critical  spirit  to  those  who  heard  him,  and  pre- 
pared the  way  for  the  formal  opening  of  the  theological  school  at 
Antioch. 

The  real  founder  of  the  school  of  Antioch  was  Lucian,  who  was 

born  at  Samosata,  in  Syria,  but  in  early  life  removed  to  ^    . 

•  c  1  •       1  liician. 

Edessa,  where  he  laid  the  foundation  of  his  thorough 

biblical  scholarship  under  the  training  of  Macarius,  an  eminent 
teacher  of  that  place.  He  afterward  removed  to  Antioch,  where 
he  was  ordained  a  presbyter,  and  acquired  great  fame  as  a  critical 
student  and  expounder  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  His  stricter  meth- 
ods put  a  check  to  the  allegorical  and  mystical  interpretations  so 
popular  at  the  time,  and  which  had  received  great  strength  and 
currency  by  the  influence  of  Origen.  Jerome  speaks  of  him  as  a 
most  eloquent  man,  so  laborious  in  his  critical  study  of  the  Scrip- 
tures that  copies  edited  by  him  were  long  afterward  known  as 
Lucianean.'  He  elsewhere  says  that  while  Hesychius'  edition  of 
the  Septuagint  was  used  in  Egypt,  that  of  Lucian  was  preferred  by 
all  the  Church  from  Constantinople  to  Antioch.*  Unfortunately, 
none  of  the  works  of  Lucian,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  frag- 
ments, have  come  down  to  us. 

It   is  worthy  of   note  that  Arius  and   Eusebius  of   Nicomedia 

1  See  Lardner,  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History,  vol.  ii,  p.  434.     London,  1788. 
"  Ecclesiastical  History,  book  vii,  chap,  xxxii. 
^  Do  viris  illustribus,  chap.  Ixxvii. 
*  Prsefatio  in  Librum  Paralipomenon. 


646  HISTORY  OF 

received  their  training  in  the  school  of  Lucian.  The  principles 
Arian  leaders  of  free  grammatical  interpretation  inculcated  by  the 
uiJ'laticxjhian  learned  presbyter  of  Antioch  encouraged  an  indepen- 
schooi.  dent  and  fearless  tendency  which  was  liable  to  run  into 

extremes.  Neander  thoughtfully  observes :  "  In  cases  where  this 
<lirection  was  not  accompanied  with  a  general  intuition  of  biblical 
ideas  vitalized  by  Christian  experience,  and  this  general  intuition 
had  not  made  plain  the  true  relation  of  the  particular  to  the  general 
in  the  expressions  of  holy  writ,  it  might  tend,  by  laying  too  great 
stress  on  particulars,  and  giving  them  undue  prominence,  to  pro- 
mote narrow  views  of  the  truths  of  faith.  This  was  the  case  with 
Arius,  in  whom  a  tendency  to  narrow  conceptions  of  the  under- 
standing, exclusive  of  the  intuitive  faculty,  predominated."^ 

Lucian  suffered  martyrdom  about  A.  D.  312,  and  does  not  appear 
to  have  been  succeeded  by  any  one  of  equal  ability  or 
fame.  But  we  find  the  sharp  opposition  of  the  Antio- 
chian  school  to  that  of  Origen  represented  in  Eustathius,  who  be- 
came bishop  of  Antioch  in  A.  D.  325.  He  was  distinguished  both 
for  secular  learning  and  for  thorough  acquaintance  Avith  the  Scrip- 
tures. He  was  a  voluminous  writer,  but  of  all  his  Avorks  only  one,  a 
treatise  on  the  Witch  of  Endor,  is  now  known  to  be  extant.  This 
treatise  was  written  against  Origen,  who  maintained  that  the  witch 
had  really  brought  up  the  spirit  of  the  prophet  Samuel.  Eustathius 
opposed  this  view  with  great  learning  and  acuteness,  and  argued 
that  Samuel  did  not  appear  at  all,  but  that  the  whole  transaction 
was  a  work  of  deception,  perpetrated  through  the  agency  of  Satan." 
Eusebius,  commonly  known  as  bishop  of  Emesa,  Avas  for  some 
Eiisebius  of  time  identified  with  the  church  and  school  of  Antioch. 
Etnesa.  Uq  ^yas  descended  from  a  noble  family  of  Edessa,  and 

from  childhood  was  carefully  instructed  in  the  Scriptures  and  in 
Greek  literature.  He  died  at  Antioch  about  A.  D.  360.  Accord- 
ing to  Jerome  he  maintained  the  historical  sense  of  Scripture  and 
was  the  author  of  Homilies  on  the  Gospels,  and  a  commentary  on 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians;'  but  only  a  few  fragments  of  his 
writings  remain. 

More  noted  and  influential  than  any  of  the  above-named  teachers 

at  Antioch  was  Diodorus,  who  afterward  became  bishop 

of  Tarsus.    Socrates,  the  Church  historian,  speaks  of  hira 

as  president  of  a  monastery,  and  the  author  of  "  many  treatisi.\s,  in 

'  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,  vol.  ii,  p.  361. 

'  This  ti'Ciitiso  of  f'ustiithius,  and  fratuments  of  his  and  other  works,  are  given  in 
Migm-'s  (Jn-ck  Patrologiiu  Cursus  Completus,  vol.  xviii,  pp.  014-794. 
*  De  viris  iihistribus,  chap.  xci. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  647 

which  he  limited  his  expositions  to  the  literal  sense  of  Scripture, 
without  attempting  to  explain  that  which  was  mystical."'  Accord- 
ing to  Jerome  he  was  a  distinguished  presbyter  of  Antioch,  and 
Avrote  commentaries  and  other  books,  in  which  he  imitated  the 
manner  of  Eusebius  of  Emesa,  but  could  not  equal  him  in  eloquence 
because  of  his  iscnorance  of  secular  literature.^  He  is  said  to  have 
written  commentaries  on  all  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and 
upon  the  four  Gospels,  the  Acts,  and  the  Epistle  of  John.^  It  ap- 
pears fi'om  numerous  brief  notices  of  him  in  the  ancient  writers 
that  he  was  held  in  the  highest  esteem,  and  was  chosen  by  the 
Council  of  Constantinople  (A.  D.  381)  to  take  charge  of  the  admin- 
istration of  the  churches  of  the  East,  without,  however,  infringing 
on  the  prerogatives  of  the  bishop  of  Antioch.^  He  set  himself 
firmly  against  the  allegorical  method  of  interjjretation,  and  instilled 
bis  principles  in  the  minds  of  many  pupils,  some  of  whom  became 
very  famous  in  the  Church.  Theodoret  says  of  him:  "The  wise 
and  courageous  Diodorus  resembled  a  large  and  limpid  stream, 
which  furnishes  plentiful  supplies  of  water  to  those  who  dwell  on 
its  banks,  and  which,  at  the  same  time,  engulfs  adversaries.  He 
-despised  the  advantages  of  high  birth,  and  underwent  the  severest 
exertions  in  defense  of  the  faith."  ^  — 

The  two  most  distinguished  disciples  of  Diodorus  wei-e  Theodore 
of  Mopsuestia,  and  John  Chrysostora  of  Constantinople.  Theodore  of 
Both  of  them  studied  philosophy  and  rhetoric  in  the  Mopsuestia. 
school  of  the  celebrated  sophist  Libanius,  the  friend  of  the  Emperor 
Julian.  Theodore  was  made  a  presbyter  at  Antioch,  but  rapidly 
acquired  reputation,  and  was  made  bishop  of  Mopsuestia  in  Cilicia, 
about  A.  D.  390.  His  long  life  and  incessant  labour  as  a  Christian 
teacher,  the  extent  of  his  learning,  the  vigour  and  acuteness  of  his 
intellect,  and  the  force  of  his  personal  character,  won  for  him  the 
title  of  Master  of  the  Orient.  He  was  a  larolific  author,  and  com- 
posed commentaries  on  various  books  of  Scripture,  of  which  only 
his  exposition  of  the  Minor  Prophets  has  been  preserved  intact  until 
the  present  time.  His  commentaries  on  Philippians,  Colossians, 
-and  Thessalonians  are  preserved  in  a  Latin  version."     He  was  an 

'  Eccl.  Hist.,  book  vi,  chap.  iii.  ^  De  viris  illustribus,  chap.  cxix. 

^  So  stated  by  Theodore  the  Reader,  as  cited  in  Suidas'  Lexicon  (Kuster's  ed.,  vol.  i, 
p.  593.  Cambr.,  1705),  under  the  name  Diodorus.  Fragments  of  the  commentaries  of 
Diodorus  are  given  in  vol.  xxxiii  of  Migne's  Greek  Patrologiae  Cursus  Completus. 

*  Socrates,  Eccl.  Hist.,  book  v,  chap.  viii. 

*  Theodoret,  Eccl.  Hist.,  book  iv,  chap.  xxv. 

*  Theodore's  Commentary  on  the  Minor  Prophets  was  published  by  Mai,  in  vol.  vii 
of  his  Patrum  Nova  Bililiotheca  (Rome,  1854),  and  by  Wegner  (Berol.,  1834).  Frag- 
ments of  his  other  works  are  given  by  Fritzsche,  Theod.  Mops.,  in  N.  Test.  Comm. 


648  HISTORY  OF 

independent  critic,  and  a  straightforward,  sober,  historical  inter- 
preter. He  had  no  sympathy  with  the  mystical  methods  of  the 
Alexandrian  school,  and  repudiated  their  extravagant  notions  of 
inspiration ;  but  he  went  to  an  opposite  extreme  of  denying  the  in- 
spiration of  many  j^ortions  of  the  Scriptures,  and  furnished  ration- 
alistic specimens  of  exposition  quite  barren  and  unsatisfactory. 
Nevertheless  the  Syrian  Nestorians  regarded  him  as  the  greatest  of 
exegetcs.  His  doctrines  on  the  subjects  of  Christology  and  anthro- 
pology were  severely  condemned  after  his  decease,  esjiecially  be- 
cause the  Nestoriaus  appealed  to  them  as  identical  with  their  oAvn. 
While  Theodore  represented  the  more  independent  and  rational- 
istic spirit  of  the  Antiochian  school,  Chrysostom  exhib- 
ited its  more  conservative  and  practical  tendency.  The 
tender  devotion  of  a  pious  Christian  mother,  the  rhetorical  polish 
acquired  in  the  school  of  Libanius,  and  the  assiduous  study  of  the 
Scriptures  at  the  monastery  of  the  learned  Diodorus,  were  all  to- 
gether admirably  adapted  to  develop  the  profound  exegete  and  the 
eloquent  preacher  of  the  word  of  God.  "  Through  a  rich  inward 
experience,"  says  Neander,  "  he  lived  into  the  understanding  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures ;  and  a  prudent  method  of  interpretation,  on  logical 
and  grammatical  principles,  kept  him  in  the  right  track  in  deriving 
the  spirit  from  the  letter  of  the  sacred  volume.  His  profound  and 
simple,  yet  fruitful  homiletic  method  of  treating  the  Scriptures, 
show  to  what  extent  he  was  indebted  to  both,  and  how,  in  his  case, 
both  co-operated  together." ' 

CJirysostom  wrote  more  than  six  hundred  homilies  on  the  Scrip- 
tures. They  consist  of  expository  discourses  on  Genesis,  the  Psalms, 
and  most  of  the  New  Testament.  Those  on  the  Gospel  of  Matthew 
and  the  Pauline  epistles  are  specially  valuable,  and  such  modern 
exegetes  as  Tholuck  and  Alford  have  enriched  their  pages  by 
numerous  quotations  from  this  father.  The  least  valuable  of  his 
expository  discourses  are  those  upon  the  prophets,  only  a  few  of 
which  remain.  His  ignorance  of  Hebrew,  and  his  failure  to  appre- 
hend the  spirit  of  the  Old  Testament  prophets,  are  apparent.  The 
homilies  on  the  Psalms,  however,  though  without  critical  merit, 
furnish  a  rich  banquet,  for  Chrysostom's  deep  religious  experience 
brought  him  into  complete  sympathy  with  the  psalmist.  Although 
his  credulous  nature  yielded  to  many  superstitions  of  his  age,  and 
his  pious  feeling  inclined  him  to  asceticism  and  the  self-mortifica- 

(Turici,  184Y).  and  Pitra,  Spicil.  Solesm.  (Par.,  1854).  See  also  SieflFert,' Thcod.  Mops. 
V.  T.  sobre  intcrprctandi  vindcx,  (Regiom.,  1827),  and  Kihn,  Theod.  Mops,  und  J^ 
Africanus  als  Exegeten  (Freib.,  1880). 

'  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,  vol.  ii,  p.  693. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION".  G49 

tions  of  monastic  life,  Jolm  Chrysostom  is  unquestionably  the  great- 
est commentator  among  the  early  fathers  of  the  Church.  Theodore 
of  Mopsuestia  may  have  been  more  sharply  critical,  Origen  was 
more  encyclopaedic  in  his  learning,  and  others  were  more  original 
and  profound  in  apprehending  some  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Christ- 
ian faith,  but  he  surpassed  them  all  in  the  general  good  judgment 
which  appears  in  his  expositions,  in  the  richness  of  his  sugges- 
tions, and  the  practical  value  of  what  he  said  or  wrote.  He  ia 
the  greatest  ornament  and  noblest  representative  of  the  exegetical 
school  of  Antioch.'^^^ 

Isidore  of  Pelusium,  who  flourished  in  the  early  part  of  the  fifth 
century,  was  a  disciple  of  Chrysostom.  He  has  left  Isidore  of  Pe- 
numerous  epistles,  which  are  largely  occupied  with  in-  lusium. 
terpretations  of  the  Scriptures,  and  treat  nearly  all  the  great  theo- 
logical questions  of  his  time.  His  method  of  exposition  is  like  that 
of  Chrysostom,  sober,  practical,  and  in  the  main  free  from  alle- 
gorizing. His  style  of  interpretation  may  appropriately  be  called 
historico-theological,  and  his  expositions  evince  sound  judgment, 
piety,  and  learning.^ 

I*  this  connexion  Ave  should  also  notice  the  works  of  Theodoret,. 

who  was  trained  at  the  monastery  near  Antioch,  where 
iTTc  1  -I'lPii  Theodoret. 

he  abode  tor  twenty  years,  devoting  himself  to  theolog- 
ical studies.  The  teachings  of  Diodorus,  Theodore,  and  Chrysos- 
tom, who  were  identified  with  this  same  monastery,  exerted  great 
influence  over  the  mind  of  Theodoret,  and  he  followed  substantially 
their  system  of  biblical  interpretation.  In  his  Preface  to  the  Psalms 
he  says:  "When  I  happened  upon  various  commentaries,  and  found 
some  expositors  pursuing  allegories  with  great  superabundance, 
others  adapting  prophecy  to  certain  histories  so  as  to  produce  an 
interpretation  accommodated  to  the  Jews  rather  than  to  the  nurse- 
lings of  faith,  I  considered  it  the  part  of  a  wise  man  to  avoid  the 
excess  of  both,  and  to  connect  now  with  ancient  histories  whatever 
things  belonged  to  them."  Most  of  his  remaining  works  are  exposi- 
tory, but  often  mixed  with  that  which  is  apologetic  and  controver- 
sial.^ They  cover  most  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  the 
epistles  of  Paul.     In  treating  the  historical  books  his  method  is  to 

'  The  best  edition  of  Chrysostom's  works  is  that  of  Montfaucon,  Greek  and  Latin, 
13  vols.,  Paris,  1718-38.  Reprinted  1834-39,  and  also  in  Migne's  Greek  Tatrology, 
vols,  xlvii-lxiv.  An  English  translation  of  many  of  the  Homilies  is  given  in  the  Ox- 
ford Library  of  the  Fathers,  1842  -53. 

'  The  best  edition  of  Isidore's  works  is  probably  that  of  Migne,  Greek  Patrologia? 
Cursus  Completus,  vol.  Ixxviii.     Paris,  186t>. 

^  Comp.  Rosenmiiller,  Historia  Interpretationis  Librorum  Sacrorum,  vol.  iv,  pp. 
35-142. 


650  HISTORY   OF 

state  and  discuss  the  questions  wLich  arise  on  difficult  passages, 
but  on  other  books  his  discussions  assume  the  form  of  a  continuous 
•commentary.  His  learning  was  not  great,  and  he  borrowed  much 
from  the  homilies  of  Chrysostom,  but  the  real  merits  of  his  biblical 
expositions,  from  whatever  source  he  gathered  them,  are  univer- 
sally acknowledged.  Ernesti  recommends  his  commentaries,  espe- 
cially those  on  the  Pauline  epistles,  as  peculiarly  adapted  to  the 
"wants  of  students  who  are  commencing  a  course  of  exegetical  study. 
His  comments  are  usually  short,  clear,  and  concise,  evince  a  sober 
and  discriminating  judgment,  and  are  to  be  reckoned  among  the 
best  specimens  of  ancient  exegesis.' 

The  churches  of  Syria  early  developed  into  two  main  divisions, 
•Schools  of  Edes-  those  of  the  eastern  and  the  western  provinces.  As 
sa  and  Nisibis.  Antiocli  was  the  f  hief  center  of  the  western  cities,  so 
were  Edessa  and  Nisibis  of  the  more  eastern,  and  when,  after  the 
days  of  Chrysostom  and  Theodoret,  the  school  of  Antioch  declined, 
those  chief  centres  of  Christian  activity  in  Mesopotamia  became 
more  famous  as  literary  towns  and  seats  of  exegetical  learning. 
The  appearance  of  the  Syriac  version  of  the  New  Testament  as 
early  as  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  and  the  Diatessaron  of 
Tatian,  indicates  the  interest  of  the  Syrian  mind  in  the  study  of  the 
Scriptures.  Lucian,  the  founder  of  the  Antiochian  school,  received 
his  early  training  in  the  Scriptures  from  Macarius  of  Edessa.  The 
Ignatian  epistles  appear  also  to  have  exerted  great  influence  in 
Eastern  Syria,  and  they  were  early  translated  into  the  Syriac 
tongue.  "  The  school  of  Eastern  Syria,"  says  Dorner,  "  was  distin- 
guished by  its  vivid  fancy,  by  its  religious  spirit,  at  once  tiery  and 
practical,  by  fervour,  and,  in  part,  depth  of  thought.  It  exhibited, 
also,  a  tendency  to  the  impassioned  style  and  too  gorgeous  imagery 
of  the  East,  to  mysticism  and  asceticism.  .  .  .  The  Church  of 
Western  Syria  displayed,  at  an  early  period,  that  sober,  judicious, 
and  critical  spirit  for  which  it  became  renowned,  and  by  which  it 
was  especially  distinguished  from  the  third  to  the  fifth  century. 
The  eastern  school  inclined  to  theosophy,  and  thus  had  a  certain 
affinity  with  the  religious  systems  which  prevailed  in  the  East;  the 
western,  on  the  other  liand,  took  its  stand  on  the  firm  basis  of  ex- 
]>orience  and  history.  In  a  word,  the  contrast  between  the  two 
divisions  of  the  Syrian  Church  bore  a  not  inconsiderable  resem- 
blance to  that  Avhich  exists  between  the  Lutheran  and  Reformed 
Confessions  in  Germanv."" 

'  Tlie  best  edition  of  Tlieodoret'.s  works  is  that  of  Sciiulze  and  Xosselt,  5  vols.,  IIuUc, 
1769-74.     See  also  Migne's  (ireek  Patrologia)  Cursus  Completus,  vols.  Ixxx-lxxxiv. 
'  History  of  the  Developmeut  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Person  of  Christ,  di  v.  ii,  vol.  i,  p.  29. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATIOK  651 

One  of  the  greatest  fathers  of  the  Syrian  Church  was  Ephraem, 

commonly  called  Ephraem   Syrus,  who  flourished  at 

_,,  ,  .T-..  TT  f  1  •     T  r     •       Ephraem  Syrus. 

Edessa  about  A.  D.  370.     He  spent  most  oi  his  lite  in 

writing  and  jjreaching,  and  was  a  vigorous  opponent  of  Arianism. 

His  learning  and  piety  were  the  admiration  of  his  contemporaries, 

and  he  was  often  designated  as  the  jarophet  of  the  Syrians.     He  was 

a  voluminous  writer,  and  has  left  numerous  commentaries,  homilies, 

and  poems.     Many  of  his  exegetical  discourses  and  jjolemical  and 

practical  homilies  are  written  in  poetic  form.     His  commentaries  on 

the  historical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the  Book  of  Job  are 

extant  in  Syriac,  and  those  of  the  Pauline  epistles  in  an  Armenian 

translation.      It  is  doubtful   whether  he   understood  or  used  the 

Greek  language.     His  method  of  exposition  is  mainly  that  of  the 

allegorists,  his  style  is  brilliant  and- glowing,   often  running  into 

bombast,  and  his  interpretations  are  often  fanciful,  farfetched,  and 

extravagant.' 

The  school  of  Nisibis  maintained  itself  longer  than  that  of  Edes- 
sa, and  continued  until  the  ninth  century.  The  Canon  Barsumas  and 
of  Nisibis  prescribed  a  three  years'  course  of  exegetical  ^^'^^• 
study  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  Barsumas,  who  was  ejected 
from  the  school  of  Edessa,  became  bishop  of  Nisibis  in  A.  D.  435, 
and  founded  there  the  theological  seminary  which  served  to  main- 
tain and  propagate  Nestorianism  in  various  countries  of  the  East. 
The  Avorks  of  Diodorus  of  Tarsus,  and  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia, 
translated  into  Syriac  by  Ibas,  contributed  much  toward  the 
cultivation  of  biblical  and  theological  study  throughout  Eastern 
Syria. 

Several  eminent  fathers  of  the  fourth  century,  who  belong  to  no 
particular  school  of  exegesis,  but  became  noted  in  the 
dogmatic  controversies  of  the  early  Church,  deserve  a 
passing  notice  in  the  history  of  biblical  interpretation.  Pre-emi- 
nent among  these  is  Athanasius  of  Alexandria,  the  father  of 
orthodoxy,  and  the  great  defender  of  the  faith  against  the  Arian 
heresy.  His  polemic  purposes  unfitted  him  for  calm  and  thought- 
ful exposition,  and  yet,  despite  his  Alexandrian  training,  he  rarely 

falls    into   allegoi-izing,    and   his   scriptural    arguments 

^  ^'  •      •    1  P    •    .  Epiphanlus. 

generally  proceed  upon  correct  principles  oi   interpre- 
tation.    Epiphanius,  the  patriarch  of  heresy  hunters,  has  left  some 

'  The  best  edition  of  the  works  of  Ephraem  Syrus  is  that  of  Assemanni  in  six  vols., 
Rome,  1732-46.  Nine  of  the  metrical  homilies  and  thirty-fire  of  the  Syriac  hymns 
have  been  translated  into  English  by  Burgess,  Select  Metrical  Hymns  and  Homilies  of 
Ephraem  Syrus,  Loudon,  1853.  See  also  Lengerke,  De  Ephraemi  Syri  arte  hermeneu- 
tica.  Konigsb.,  1831. 


653  HISTORY    OF 

■writings  which  are  especially  useful  in  preserv'ing  various  opinions 
of  his  time.  But  he  was  deficient  in  good  judgment,  and  fell  into 
frequent  blunders  and  self-contradictions.  He  is  said  to  have  been 
familiar  with  five  languages,  Hebrew,  Syriac,  Egyptian,  Greek,  and 
Latin. 

Basil  the  Great  has  left  numerous  homilies  on  various  parts  of 
Scripture,  which  show  that  he  was  a  man  of  extensive 
learning  and  a  sound  interpreter.  He  condemns  those 
who  do  not  accept  the  obvious  sense  of  what  is  written,  but  seek 
after  occult  meanings,  and  make  themselves  wiser  than  the  Holy 
Spirit  by  introducing  into  the  sacred  writings  fancies  and  fictions 
The  two  Greg-  of  their  own.  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  a  younger  brother  of 
ories.  Basil,  composed  several  doctrinal,  exegetical,  and  ]3rac- 

tical  treatises,  and  pursued  essentially  the  same  line  of  exposition. 
He  was  a  diffuse  writer,  and  his  style  is  often  heavy  and  weari- 
some to  the  reader.  Gregory  of  Nazianzum  was  one  of  the  most 
polished  writers  of  the  fourth  century,  and  ranks  with  Basil  and 
Chrysostom,  but  he  is  celebrated  as  the  theologian  rather  than  the 
interpreter. 

Ulphilas,  the  apostle  and  bishop  of  the  Goths,  was  master  of  the 

hiias  and  ^^'^ek  and  Hebrew  languages,  and  propagated  among 
Cyril  of  jeru-  his  people  the  love  of  letters  as  well  as  the  Gospel  of 
saiem.  Christ.     He  constructed  a  Mceso-Gothic  alphabet,  and 

translated  into  that  language  the  entire  Bible  except  the  Books  of 
Kings.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  was  the  author  of  eighteen  books  of 
sermons  entitled  Catecheses.  These  discourses  abound  with  quota- 
tions from  the  Scriptures,  and  help  to  illustrate  the  life  and  disci- 
pline of  the  Church  at  Jerusalem  during  the  fourth  century. 

Andreas,  bishop  of  Csesarea,  in  Cappadocia,  in  the  latter  part  of 
Andreas  and  the  fifth  century  wrote  a  commentary  in  Greek  upon 
Arethas.  ^j^g  Book  of  Revelation.     It  is  somewhat  miscellaneous 

in  its  character,  and  claims  to  make  use  of  what  others  had  written, 
referring  by  name  to  Irena?us,  Hippolytus,  Methodius,  Epiphanius, 
Gregory  of  Nazianzum,  and  Cyril  of  Alexandria.  The  writer 
maintains  a  threefold  sense,  the  literal,  the  tropological,  and  the 
anagogical  or  mystical,  which  last  he  makes  most  prominent  in  his 
expositions.  Arethas,  a  later  bishop  of  this  same  place,  wrote  a 
still  more  copious  commentary  on  the  Apocalypse,  and  followed 
the  same  style  and  system  of  interpretation  as  Andreas.  These 
works  are  valuable  for  their  antiquity,  but  not  for  intrinsic  merit. 

„     ^  Before  passing  to  notice  the  fathers  of  the  Western 

Porphyry.         /-  . 

Church,  we  should  consider  for  a  moment  the  critical  as- 
sault made  by  Porphyry  upon  the  allegt)rical  system  of  interpretation. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  653 

and  his  theory  of  the  })ropliecies  of  Daniel.  In  the  latter  part 
of  the  third  century  this  celebrated  Neo-Platonic  philosopher  wrote 
a  work  in  fifteen  books  against  the  Christians.  Only  a  few  frag- 
ments of  this  treatise  have  been  preserved,  from  which  it  appears 
that  in  the  first  book  Porphyry  sought  to  expose  the  discrepancies 
of  the  Bible;  in  the  third  book  he  attacked  the  allegorical  method 
of  exegesis  so  prevalent  at  the  time,  and  urged  that  writings,  Avhich 
must  be  handled  so  unhistorically  in  order  to  maintain  a  satisfac- 
tory meaning,  cannot  be  worthy  of  belief.  In  the  twelfth  and 
thirteenth  books  he  attacked  the  prophetic  portions  of  the  Book  of 
Daniel,  maintaining  that  Scriptures  purporting  to  foretell  future 
events  with  such  minuteness  of  detail  must  have  been  written  after 
the  events  which  they  portray.  lie  discovered  what  he  regarded 
as  evidence  that  the  writer  lived  in  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiph- 
anes,  and  detailed  events  to  a  definite  period  of  his  reign,  beyond 
which  he  is  vague  and  uncertain.  The  critical  sharpness  of  this 
heathen  philosopher  is  apparent  from  these  few  indications  of  his 
argument,  and  it  will  be  seen  how  his  theory  of  explaining  the 
predictions  of  Daniel  is  virtually  identical  with  the  rationalistic 
criticism  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

The  fathers  of  the  Western  Church  were,  as  a  class,  much  in- 
ferior to  those  of  the  Eastern  in  their  expositions  of  the 
Scriptures.  One  chief  reason  for  this  fact  was  their 
comparative  ignorance  of  the  original  languages  of  the  Bible.  A 
notable  exception  is  that  of  Hippolytus,  bishop  of  Portus,  at  the 
mouth  of  the  Tiber,  near  Rome.  It  is  doubtful  whether  he  should 
be  claimed  more  by  the  West  than  the  East,  for  he  was  a  disciple 
of  Irenaeus,  and  a  friend  and  admirer  of  Origen,  and,  according  to 
Baronius,  a  disciple  of  Clement  of  Alexandria.  Nevertheless,  it  is 
quite  certain  that  he  spent  the  greater  portion  of  his  life  in  Rome 
and  its  vicinity.  His  great  work,  recently  discovered,  on  the  Refu- 
tation of  all  Heresies,  contains  numerous  expositions  of  difi^erent 
passages  of  Scripture,  and  shows  that  he  was  an  extreme  allegorist. 
He  appears  to  have  written  commentaries  on  most  of  the  Bible, 
and  numerous  fragments  remain.  His  exegetical  method  is  substan- 
tially that  of  Philo,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  Origen,  and  in 
some  things,  if  possible,  even  more  extravagant.  Nevertheless,  his 
writings  are  of  great  value  as  exhibiting  the  heresies  and  disputes 
of  his  time,  and  some  of  his  Scripture  expositions  are  thoughtful 
and  suggestive.' 

'  The  extant  works  of  Hippolytus  have  been  published  in  many  editions,  the  best 
of  which  is,  perhaps,  that  of  Lagarde,  Lps.,  18.58.  An  English  translation  is  given  in 
vols,  vi  and  ix  of  the  Edinburgh  Ante-Nicene  Christian  Library. 


654  HISTORY    OF 

Tertullian  occupies  a  con.spicuous  place  among  the  Latin  fathers, 

and  is  the  most  ancient  whose  works  are  now  extant.  He 
Tertulliau.  •  ■•      ^  ii-- 

nourished  at  the  beginnmg  of  the  third  century,  and  is 

chiefly  distinguished  for  his  vigorous  and  violent  writinars  a^^ainst 

the  Gnostics.      So  far  as  his  works  deal  with  the  exposition  of 

the  Scriptures,  he  belongs  to  the  historico-theological  school,  and 

he  lays  great  stress  upon  tlie  regula  fidei,  rule  of  faith,  supposed 

to    have    been     transmitted    from    the    apostles    to    all    the    true 

Churches  of  Christ."     He  allows  allegorical  interpretation   in  the 

treatment  of  prophecies,  and  in  a  few  cases  adopts  it  where  the 

passage  cannot  reasonably  admit  of  any  such  method  of  exposition; 

but  he  generally  maintains  the  literal  and  most  obvious  sense  of 

Scripture." 

Cyprian,  who  was  bishop  of  Carthage  from  A.  D.  248  to  258,  was 
very  simple  and  practical  in  his  expositions  of  Scrip- 
ture, He  followed  the  general  method  of  Tertullian, 
whom  lie  called  the  Master,  and  for  whose  writings  he  ever  showed 
a  special  fondness.  He  is  pre-eminently  famous  for  his  maintain- 
ance  of  the  authority  of  the  Church,  and  prelatical  doctrines  which 
placed  the  unity  of  the  Church  in  the  episcopate,  and  involved  the 
legitimate  primacy  of  the  bishop  of  Rome.  Like  other  fathers 
who  have  left  numerous  writings,  he  incidentally  treats  many  pas- 
sages of  the  Scriptures,  and,  like  Tertullian,  is  to  be  classed  with 
the  historico-theological  interpreters.' 

There  is  extant,  under  the  name  of  Victorinus,  bishop  of  Petau 

(Petavium  in  Pannonia),  a  commentary  on  the  Apoca- 

Victorinus.  J^  .  '  -'  ' 

lypse.  V  ictorinus  lived  near  the  close  ot  the  third  cen- 
tury, and,  according  to  Jerome,  wrote  commentaries  on  most  of  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament.  Besides  his  work  on  the  Apocalypse 
we  have  also  a  fragment  of  his  treatise  on  the  Creation  of  the 
World.  The  Avriter  is  exceedingly  fanciful  in  most  of  his  exposi- 
tions, and  spiritualizes  after  the  manner  of  the  allegorists  generally. 
Here  and  there  an  excellent  thought  is  presented,  and  there  are 

*  "  It  is  impossible,"  says  Davidson,  "  to  calculate  the  mischief  which  this  appeal 
to  ecclesiastical  authority  occasioned  in  after  times.  The  suflicieucy  of  the  hoi}- 
word  was  virtually  impugned  and  denied ;  the  overseers  of  the  Ciiurch  claimed  to  be 
authorized  interpreters  b}'  virtue  of  a  commissicm  liauded  down  from  the  apostles; 
and  doctrines  were  jjromulgated,  not  by  the  aid  of  the  Scriptures,  but  by  the  aid  of  a 
tradition  in  the  Church." — Sacred  Ilermeneutics,  p.  HI. 

*  The  best  edition  of  Tertulliau  is  that  of  Oehler,  3  vols.,  Lps.,  1853.  English  trans- 
lation in  four  vols,  (vii,  xi,  xv,  and  xviii)  of  the  ICdinburgh  Ante-Nicene  Christian 
Library. 

'  An  English  translation  of  Cyprian's  writings  is  given  in  vols,  viii  and  xiii  of  the 
Edinburgh  Ante-Nicene  Christian  Library. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  655 

some  sensible  explanations  of  single  passages,  Init,  as  a  whole,  the 
work  is  rambling  and  full  of  arbitrary  conceptions.  It  is  especially 
interesting  as  being  one  of  the  oldest  specimens  of  continuous  com- 
mentary.' 

About  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century  flourished  Hilary  of 
Poitiers,    in  France,    a   man  "  who    was  distinguished 

'  Hiltiry. 

amono;  the  doctrinal  writers  of  the  Western  Church  for 
a  profoundness  of  intellect  and  a  freedom  of  spirit  peculiarly  his 
own."^  So  forcibly  did  he  maintain  the  Athanasian  faith  against 
its  enemies  that  he  was  called  the  Hammer  of  the  Arians.  In  his 
doctrinal  writings  he  is  often  discriminating  and  able  in  his  use  of 
appropriate  proof-texts,  but  as  an  exegete  he  belongs  to  the  school 
of  Origen,  whose  works  had  much  influence  over  both  his  thought 
and  his  style,  and  whose  commentary  on  Job  he  is  said  to  have 
translated  into  Latin.  His  commentaries  on  the  Psalms  and 
the  Gospel  of  Matthew  are  modelled  after  the  tone  and  spirit  of 
the  great  Alexandrian  scholar,  and  abound  Avith  allegorical  fan- 
cies.' 

Ambrose,  bishop  of  Milan  (A.  D.  374-397),  was  even  a  more  fan- 
ciful   and    lawless   allegorizer    than    either   Origen    or 

^  ^  Ambrose. 

Hilary.  He  treats  the  historical  sense  as  of  no  account, 
and  extols  the  hidden  mystical  meaning  of  the  sacred  oracles,  some 
parts  of  which  he  aflirms  have  several  different  significations.  He 
sees  in  Noah's  ark  a  mystical  representation  of  the  human  body. 
The  four  kings  of  the  East  mentioned  Gen.  xiv,  1,  denote  the 
allurements  of  the  flesh  and  the  world;  the  five  kings  of  the  ])lain 
of  Sodom  (ver.  8)  are  the  five  senses  of  the  body,  and  Abraham 
represents  Christ  as  the  conqueror  of  fleshly  appetites.  In  the  nar- 
rative of  our  Lord's  entry  into  Jerusalem  the  ass  which  was  tied 
represents  mankind  as  bound  in  sin,  and  the  loosing  of  the  same  is 
the  redemption  of  Christ.  The  placing  of  their  garments  under 
Christ  showed  that  the  apostles  were  ready  to  sacrifice  their  own 
works  for  the  honour  of  preaching  the  Gospel.  The  strewing  of 
the  branches  by  the  way  denotes  the  cutting  off  of  unfruitful 
Avorks !  * 

'  An  English  translation  of  Victorinus'  Commentary  on  the  Apocalypse,  and  also 
of  the  fragment  on  the  Creation,  is  given  in  toI.  xviii  of  the  Edinburgh  Antc-Niccne 
Christian  Library. 

-Neander,  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,  vol.  ii,  p.  396. 

^  Hilary's  works  have  been  published  in  many  editions,  the  best  is,  perhaps,  that  of 
tlie  Benedictines,  Paris,  1693,  fol. 

•*  The  wiitings  of  Ambrose  are  more  numerous  than  useful.  The  best  edition  is 
that  of  the  Benedictines  in  2  vols.,  fol.,  Paris,  1686-90.  The  exegetical  treatises  are 
in  the  first  volume. 


<556  HISTORY    OF 

111  the  latter  part  of  the  fourth  and  the  earlier  part  of  the  fifth 
century  there  flourished,  contempoi-aneously,  the  great- 
est biblical  scholar,  the  greatest  theologian,  and  the 
most  distinguished  heretic,  of  the  ancient  Western  Church.  These 
Avere  Jerome,  Augustine,  and  Pelagius.  Jerome  was  born  at  Stri- 
<ion,  on  the  borders  of  Pannonia,  but  early  in  life  removed  to  Rome, 
where  he  diligently  prosecuted  his  studies  under  the  best  masters. 
He  afterward  travelled  through  Gaul,  and  transcribed  Hilary's  com- 
mentary on  the  Psalms.  About  A.  D.  372  he  visited  the  East,  pass- 
ing thi'ough  the  most  interesting  provinces  of  Asia  JVIinor,  and 
pausing  for  a  time  at  Antioch  in  Syria.  Here  he  was  prostrated  by 
a  severe  fevei-,  and  in  a  dream  received  strong  condemnation  for 
his  devotion  to  the  heathen  classics,  which  he  thereupon  vowed  to 
renounce  forever.  He  betook  himself  to  monastic  life,  and  thought 
to  crucify  his  taste  for  Roman  literature  by  the  study  of  Hebrew. 
He  afterward  visited  Constantinople,  and  pursued  his  studies,  espe- 
cially in  Greek,  under  Gregory  of  Nazianzum.  Here  he  translated 
Eusebius'  Chronicle,  and  the  commentaries  of  Origen  on  Jeremiah 
and  Ezekiel.  About  A.  D.  38G  he  settled  in  Bethlehem  of  Judaea, 
and  there,  in  monkish  seclusion  and  assiduous  study,  spent  the  rest 
of  his  life.  He  wrote  commentaries  upon  most  of  the  books  of  the 
Bible,  revised  the  old  Latin  version,  and  made  a  new  translation  of 
the  Old  Testament  from  the  original  Hebrew  text.  His  generation 
was  not  competent  to  appreciate  these  literary  labours,  and  not  a 
few  regarded  it  as  an  impious  presumption  to  assume  that  the  Sep- 
tuagint  version  could  be  improved  by  an  appeal  to  the  Hebrew. 
That  seemed  like  preferring  Barabbas  to  Jesus.  Nevertheless,  the 
Vulgate  speedily  took  rank  with  the  great  versions  of  the  Bible, 
and  became  the  authorized  translation  used  in  the  Western  Church. 
It  is  more  faithful  to  the  Hebrew  than  the  Septuagint,  and  was 
probably  made  with  the  help  of  Origen's  Hexapla,  which  was  then 
accessible  in  the  library  of  C»sarea. 

"  As  a  commentator,"  writes  Osgood,  "  Jerome  deserves  less  hon- 
osKood  on  Je-  *^"^  than  as  a  translator,  so  hasty  his  comments  gen- 
roine  as  acorn-  erally  are,  and  so  frequently  consisting  of  fragments 
gathered  from  previous  writers.  His  merit  however  is — 
and  this  was  by  no  means  a  common  one  in  his  day — that  he  gener- 
ally aims  to  give  the  literal  sense  of  the  passages  in  question.  He 
read  apparently  all  that  had  been  written  by  the  leading  interpreters 
before  him,  and  then  wrote  his  own  commentaries  in  great  haste 
without  stopping  to  distinguish  his  own  views  from  those  of  the 
authorities  consulted.  He  dashed  through  a  thousand  lines  of  the 
text  in  a  sin^^le  day,  and  went  through  the  Gospel  of  Matthew  in  a 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  657 

fortnight.  He  sometimes  yielded  to  the  allegorical  methods  of 
interpretation,  and  showed  frequent  traces  of  the  influence  of  his 
study  of  Origen.  Yet  he  seems  not  to  have  inclined  to  this  method 
so  much  from  his  own  taste  as  from  the  habit  of  his  time.  And  if, 
of  the  four  doctoi's  of  the  Church  pp.rticularized  by  some  writers,  to 
Gregory  belongs  excellence  in  tropology,  to  Ambrose  in  allegory, 
to  Augustine  in  anagoge,  to  Jerome  is  given  the  jialm  in  the  literal 
and  grammatical  sense.  .  .  .  Rich  and  elegant  as  his  style  frequent- 
ly is,  he  does  not  appear  to  have  had  very  good  taste  as  a  critic. 
He  had  not  that  delicate  appreciation  of  an  author's  meaning  that 
enables  one  to  seize  hold  of  the  main  idea  or  sentiment,  and  through 
this  interpret  the  language  and  illustrations.  He  could  not  repro- 
duce the  thoughts  of  the  prophets  and  poets  of  the  Old  Testament 
in  his  own  mind,  and  throw  himself  into  their  position.  Their 
poetic  figures  he  sometimes  treats  as  logical  jDropositions,  and  finds 
grave  dogmas  in  casual  illustrations."  * 

In  learning  and  general  culture  Jerome  was  much  sujaerior  to 
Augustine,  but  in  depth  and  penetration,  in  originality 
of  genius  and  power  of  thought,  AugustinC;  bishop  of  "^^^  ^°^' 
Hippo,  in  Africa,  was  by  far  the  greatest  man  of  his  age.  If  it  be 
any  evidence  of  greatness  for  one  mind  to  shape  and  direct  the 
theological  studies  and  speculation^  of  more  than  a  thousand  years, 
and  after  all  the  enlightenment  of  modern  times  to  maintain  his 
hold  upon  men  of  the  deepest  piety  and  the  highest  intellectual 
power,  then  must  it  be  conceded  that  few  if  any  Christian  writers 
of  all  the  ages  have  equalled  Augustine.  But  of  his  doctrines  and 
his  rank  as  a  theologian  it  is  not  in  our  way  to  speak.  Only  as  an 
interpreter  of  Scripture  do  we  here  consider  him,  and  as  such  we 
cannot  in  justice  award  him  a  place  correspondent  with  his  theo- 
logical fame.  His  conceptions  of  divine  truth  were  comprehensive 
and  profound,  but  having  no  knowledge  of  Hebrew  and  a  very  im- 
perfect acquaintance  with  Greek,  he  was  incapacitated  for  thorough 
and  independent  study  of  the  sacred  books.  He  was  dependent  on 
the  current  faulty  Latin  version,  and  not  a  few  of  his  theological 
arguments  are  built  upon  an  erroneous  interpretation  of  the  Scrip- 
ture text.  In  his  work  on  Christian  Doctrine  he  lays  down  a  num- 
ber of  very  sensible  rules  for  the  exposition  of  the  Bible,  but  in 

'  Jerome  and  his  Times;  article  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  Feb.,  1848,  pp.  138, 
139.  The  works  of  Jerome  have  been  published  in  many  forms;  best  edition,  by  Val- 
larsi  and  Maffei  in  11  vols.,  Verona,  1734-42;  reprinted,  with  some  revision,  Venice, 
17G6-71.  See  also  Migne's  Latin  Patrologise  Cursus  Completus,  vols,  xxii-xxx,  Paris, 
1845,  1846.  The  best  treatise  on  Jerome  is  that  of  Zockler,  Hieronymus,  sein  Lebea 
•und  Werken  aus  seinem  Schriften  dargestellt,  Gotha,  1865. 
42 


658  HISTORY  OF 

practice  he  forsakes  his  own  hermeneutical  principles,  and  often 
runs  into  excessive  allecrorizinsr.  He  allows  four  different  kinds  of 
interpretation,  the  historical,  the  etiological,  the  analogical,  and 
the  allegorieal,  but  he  treats  these  methods  as  traditional,  and  gives 
them  no  extended  or  uniform  application.  His  commentaries  on 
Genesis  and  Job  are  of  little  value.  His  exposition  of  the  Psalms- 
contains  many  rich  thoughts,  together  with  much  that  is  vague  and 
mystical.  The  treatise  in  four  books  on  the  Consensus  of  the 
Evano-elists  is  one  of  the  best  of  the  ancient  attempts  to  construct 
a  Gospel  harmony,  but  his  Evangelical  Inquiries  (Quaestiones  Evan- 
gelicae)  are  full  of  fanciful  interpretation  and  mystic  allegorizing. 
His  best  expositions  are  of  those  passages  on  which  his  own  rich 
experience  and  profound  acquaintance  with  the  operations  of  the 
human  heart  enabled  him  to  comment  with  surpassing  beauty  and 
great  practical  force.  His  exegetical  treatises  are  the  least  valuable 
of  his  multifarious  writings,  but  through  all  his  works  are  scattered 
many  brilliant  and  precious  gems  of  thought.' 

Pelagius,  supposed  to  have  been  a  British  monk,  Avent  to  Rome 
about  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century,  and  there  pub- 
lished a  commentary  on  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  in  which  he 
set  forth  the  heretical  opinions  which  have  ever  since  been  associ- 
ated with  his  name.  His  theological  views  were  shared  and  ear- 
nestly defended  by  his  disciple  and  friend  Coelestius,  who  accom- 
panied him  to  Carthage.  Pelagius  appears  to  have  been  a  man  of 
blameless  moral  character,  and  of  considerable  learning  and  force. 
Besides  his  comments  on  the  Pauline  epistles  he  wrote  numerous 
treatises  which  exerted  much  influence  on  the  theolofjical  tliinking 
of  that  period.  His  defective  views  of  the  nature  of  sin  and  the 
work  of  divine  grace  in  salvation  disqualified  him  both  as  a  profound 
exegete  and  a  theologian.  But  his  comments  are  specimens  of  brief 
and  simple  exposition,  and  avoid  the  habit  of  allegorizing.'^ 

Tichonius,  a  contemporary  of  Jerome  and  Augustine,  de- 
serves notice  for  making  perhaps  the  first  formal  attempt 
to  lay  down  a  number  of  hermeneutical  rules  for  the  interpretation 

'  Augustine's  works  have  been  printed  in  very  many  editions,  the  latest  of  which  is 
that  of  Jligne,  in  fifteen  vols.  Paris,  1842.  More  sumptuous  is  the  Benedictine  edi- 
tion, in  eleven  folio  vols.  Venice,  1729-35.  An  P^nglish  translation  of  his  exposition 
of  the  Psalms  and  Gospels  is  given  in  the  Oxford  Library  of  the  Fathers,  and  his 
commentary  on  John,  the  work  on  Christian  Doctrine,  the  Enchiridion,  and  numerous 
other  treatises  are  published  in  Clark's  Foreign  Theological  Library,  Edinburgh. 

*  The  extant  works  of  Pelagius  are  usually  printed  with  the  writings  of  Jerome,  and 
numerous  extracts  are  found  in  Augustine's  controversial  treatises;  but  they  have 
all  suffered  more  or  less  nmtilation.  Comp.  Rosenmiiller,  Ilistoria  Interpretationis 
Libroruni  Sacrorum,  vol.  iii,  pp.  .503-637. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  659 

of  the  Scriptures.  His  work  is  entitled  Seven  Rules  for  investigat- 
ing and  discovering  the  sense  of  the  Scriptures.  He  propounds  his 
canons  as  so  many  keys  to  unlock,  and  lamps  to  illuminate,  the  secrets 
of  the  laAv;  but  his  rules  consist  mainly  of  rambling  observations 
on  particular  passages  of  Scripture,  and  are  of  very  little  value.  ^ 

Vincentius,  a  monk  and  priest,  wlio  was  educated  at  a  cloister  in 
the  island  of  Lerins  in  Provence,  deserves  a  passing  notice  vincent  of 
on  account  of  his  Commonitorium,  a  work  designed  to  Lerins. 
show  that  Scripture  and  the  tradition  of  the  Catholic  Church  are 
both  necessary  in  order  to  establish  the  true  doctrines  of  faitli. 
That  exposition  which  is  believed  everywhere,  always,  and  by  all 
(quod  ubique,  quod  semper,  quod  ab  omnibus  creditum  est)  is  the 
only  true  one.  His  treatise  is  a  textbook  of  ecclesiastico-traditional 
interpretation,  but  it  is  of  no  value  except  with  those  who  hold 
Church  tradition  and  authority  above  reason  and  conscience. 

Cassiodorus,  commonly  called  the  Senator,  flourished  during  the 
first  half  of  the  sixth  centtiry,  and  was  noted  for  his  de- 
votion to  biblical  literature.  He  was  the  author  of  a 
work  entitled  De  Institutione  Divinarum  Literarxim,  and  also  of 
comments  on  the  Psalms  and  the  apostolical  epistles.  His  exposi- 
tions are  partly  in  the  form  of  a  paraphrase,  and  usually  set  forth 
the  literal  sense  of  the  Scriptui-e;  but  they  show  no  great  penetra- 
tion, and  are  without  much  interest  or  value.''' 

Gregory  the  Great,  who  became  pope  of  Rome  A.  D.  595,  was  a 
very  voluminous  writer,  and,  besides  many  other  works,  Gregory  the 
composed  a  commentary  (called  Moralia)  on  the  Book  of  Great. 
Job,  and  homilies  on  Ezekiel  and  the  Gospels.  Although  he  laid 
the  foundations  of  the  papacy  and  the  Romish  medieeval  system, 
he  disclaimed  the  title  of  universal  bishop,  and  exerted  himself  to 
promote  the  study  of  the  Scriptures  among  the  clergy  and  the  laity. 
When  Bishop  Natalis  would  fain  excuse  himself  from  such  study 
on  the  ground  of  physical  infirmity,  Gregory  referred  him  to  Rom. 
XV,  4,  and  urged  that  the  more  we  are  bowed  down  with  afiiiction 
or  burdened  with  the  troubles  of  the  times,  the  more  we  need  the 
comfort  of  the  Scriptures.  But  this  distinguished  prelate  was  too 
thoroughly  imbued  with  the  superstitions  of  his  age  to  be  a  sound 
interpreter.  His  learning  and  critical  judgment  were  notably  in- 
ferior to  his  piety  and  devotion  to  the  Church.  As  an  interpreter 
he  maintains  the  histoi'ical  sense,  but  also  the  allegorical  and  the 

'  The  writings  of  Tielionius  may  be  found  in  the  sixth  volume  of  the  Maxima  Bib- 
liotheca  Yeterum  Patrum.     Lyons,  1 6*7*7. 

-  Cassiodorus'  worivs  were  published  by  Doni  Garet  in  two  vols,  fol.,  Rouen,  1679,  and 
Venice,  1729 ;  also  in  Migne's  Latin  Patrologia3  Cursus  Completus,  vols.  Ixix-lxxi. 


660  HISTORY  OF 

spiritual,  or  moral.  His  work  on  Job  is  full  of  mystical  allegoriz- 
ing; his  homilies  on  Ezekiel  are  of  much  the  same  cast,  but  those 
on  the  "Gospels  are  of  a  more  practical  character.' 

As  we  review  the  history  of  patristic   exegesis  we  notice  the 

progress  of  two  opposite  tendencies  operative  from  the 
General    char-    '       °      .  ^     i       >.i     •     •  rm 

acter  of  patris-  beginning  of  the  Christian  era.      1  he  one  was  a  specu- 

tic  exegesis.  Jative  spirit,  a  habit  of  allegorizing,  begotten  of  asso- 
ciated Judaism  and  Platonism;  it  received  a  mighty  impulse  in  the 
Alexandrian  school,  and  has  maintained  more  or  less  influence  even 
to  the  present  day.  The  other  tendency  was  of  a  more  practical 
character.  It  originated  with  our  Lord  and  his  apostles,  who  con- 
demned the  fanciful  speculations  and  Hagadic  traditions  of  their 
time,  and  set  the  example  of  a  sober  and  rational  interpretation  of 
the  Scriptures.  It  was  the  distinguishing  feature  of  the  school  of 
Antioch,  and  exhibits  some  of  its  best  results  in  the  exegetical 
works  of  Chrysostom  and  Theodoret.  But  this  more  grammatical 
and  logical  method  of  interpretation  attained  no  complete  develop- 
ment among  the  ancient  fathers.  The  prevalence  of  superstitions, 
the  blind  credulity  of  the  masses,  the  strong  tendencies  to  asceti- 
cism and  mysticism,  and  the  defective  knowledge  of  the  original 
languages  of  the  Bible,  gave,  in  the  main,  an  advantage  to  the  alle- 
gorists,  and  rendered  a  thorough  grammatico-historical  interpreta- 
tion impossible.^  Hence,  we  are  not  to  look  to  the  ancient  fathers 
for  models  of  exegesis.  Their  writings  contain  numerous  imper- 
ishable gems  of  thought,  and  exhibit  great  intellectual  acumen  and 
logical  subtlety,  but  as  interpreters  of  the  sacred  volume  they  have 
been  far  surpassed  by  the  moderns.  Notwithstanding  his  extrava- 
gant allegorizing,  Origen  will  ever  be  prized  for  his  great  learning 
and  remarkable  service  in  biblical  criticism,  and  the  works  of  Chry- 
sostom, Theodoret,  and  Jerome,  despite  their  frequent  errors,  will 
ever  hold  high  rank  in  biblical  literature;  but  the  time  is  passed 
when  an  appeal  to  the  opinions  of  the  eai'ly  fathers  has  any  consid- 
erable weight  with  men  of  learning. 

'  The  best  edition  of  Gregory's  works  is  the  Benedictine,  in  four  vols,  folio,  Paris, 
1705.  They  were  also  published  in  seventeen  vols,  at  Venice,  1768-76,  and  in  five  vols, 
in  Migne's  Latin  Patrologiae  Cursus  Completus  (vols.  Ixxv-lxxix).  An  English  trans- 
lation of  the  Moralia  on  Job  is  given  in  four  vols,  in  the  Oxford  Library  of  the  Fathers. 

'  The  allegorizing  tendency  could,  without  much  ditHculty,  accommodate  itself  wholly 
to  the  form  of  the  tradition  in  the  dominant  Church,  and  explain  the  Bible  in  con- 
formity tlierewith.  The  more  uni)rojn(liced,  grammatical,  and  logical  interpretation 
of  the  Bible  would  tend,  on  the  other  hand,  to  purge  the  existing  system  of  Church 
doctrine  of  the  various  foreign  elements  which  had  found  entrance  through  the  Church 
tradition,  guiilcd  as  that  tradition  had  been  by  no  clear  consciousness  of  the  truth. — 
Keander,  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,  vol.  ii,  p.  351. 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION.  661 


CHAPTER  V. 

EXEGESIS    OF    THE    MIDDLE    AGES. 

During  the  period  extending  from  Gregory  the  Great  to  the  time 

of  Luther  (A.  D.  600  to  A.  D.  1500),  the  true  exegeti-   „ 

.   .        ^  ''  .        ,      ,  =5  No  great  exe- 

cal  spirit  could  scarcely  be  expected  to  maintain  itself,  getes  during 
or  produce  works  of  great  merit.  The  monasteries  be-  ^^^^  penod. 
came  the  principal  seats  of  learning,  and  the  treasures  of  theolog- 
ical literature  gradually  found  their  way  to  them  as  to  so  many 
asylums.  The  Scriptures  were  everywhere  regarded  as  a  holy 
treasure,  and  many  were  wont  to  consult  them  for  oracular  re- 
sponses. If  one  was  about  to  embark  in  some  dangerous  enterprise, 
he  would  open  the  Bible  and  regard  the  first  words  which  met  his 
eye  as  a  special  revelation  to  himself.'  Superstition  and  ignorance 
effectually  hindered  the  progress  of  critical  inquiry.  Nevertheless, 
a  number  of  distinguished  writers  appeared  during  the  Middle  Ages 
who  devoted  themselves  to  the  study  of  the  sacred  books,  and  have 
left  works  in  the  department  of  biblical  exegesis  which  rleserve  .at- 
tention. 

To  this  period  belong  the  so-called  catenists,  or  compilers  of  ex- 
positions from  tlie  more  ancient  fathers.  It  was  not  an  r^^^  g^riy  cat- 
age  of  original  research,  but  of  imitation  and  ap})ropri-  enists. 
ation  of  the  treasures  of  the  past.  Among  the  earliest  of  these 
compilers  was  Procopius  of  Gaza,  who  wrote  commentaries  on  the 
Pentateuch,  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  the  Books  of  Kings,  Chroni- 
cles, Proverbs,  Canticles,  and  Isaiah.^  To  this  class  of  expositors 
belong  also  Andreas  and  Arethas,  already  mentioned,  and  Olympi- 
odorus,  who  lived  in  the  early  part  of  the  sixth  century,  and  wrote 
comments  on  Job,  Ecclesiastes,  and  Jeremiah.  The  more  distin- 
guished catenists  appeared  at  a  later  date. 

The  Venerable  Bede,  one  of  the  most  eminent  fathers  of  the 
English    Church,    flourished   about    the   beginning    of    the   eighth 

'When  Clovis  was  about  to  make  war  on  the  West  Goths  in  Spain  he  prayed  God 
that  he  would  reveal  to  him,  as  he  entered  the  Church  of  St.  Martin,  a  fortunate  issue 
of  the  war;  and  as  at  that  moment  the  words  of  Psa.  xviii,  40,  41,  were  chanted,  the 
king  regarded  this  as  an  infallible  oracle  by  which  he  was  assured  of  the  victory.  He, 
in  fact,  obtained  the  victory,  which  confirmed  him  in  his  belief. — Xeander,  History  of 
the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,  vol.  iii,  p.  129. 

'Given  in  vol.  Ixxxvii  of  Migne's  Greek  Patrologiae  Cursus  Completus,  Paris,  1860. 


G63  HISTORY    OF 

century.  He  spent  his  life  in  the  monasteries  of  Jarrow  and  "NVear- 
The  Venerable  rnouth,  and  made  himself  familiar  with  all  the  learning  of 
Bede.  j^ig  a^e.     His  commentaries  extend  over  the  entire  New 

Testament  and  a  large  portion  of  the  Old.  They  are,  in  substance, 
compilations  from  the  works  of  Augustine,  Basil,  and  Ambrose, 
.and  properly  belong  to  the  class  called  catenae.  Later  catenists, 
however,  placed  him  among  the  fathers,  and  transcribed  his  com- 
ments as  if  they  had  been  original.  His  expositions  are  mainly 
allegorical,  for  he  closely  followed  the  methods  of  those  from  whom 
he  took  the  principal  part  of  his  comments.' 

Bede  Avas  the  educator  of  many  other  Church  teachers.     During 

the  latter  part  of  his  life  he  was  sui-rounded  by  admir- 
School  of  York.    .  ^.     .    !;  .  iii-         •      ^       -^i  i  <> 

ing  disciples  whom   he   had  inspired  with  a  love  tor 

study.  Egbert,  archbishop  of  York,  was  one  of  his  pupils,  and, 
after  the  master's  death,  he  sought  to  carry  forward  his  work,  and 
superintended  a  school  at  York  where  biblical  studies  were  culti- 
vated. In  this  school  Flaccus  Alcuin  received  his  training,  and 
learned  the  Latin,  Greek,  and  Hebrew  languages.  He  afterward 
became  headmaster  of  the  school,  and  made  it  so  famous  that 
scholars  came  from  distant  places  to  enioy  its  advan- 
tages.  In  a  journey  to  Rome  about  A.  D.  780,  having 
made  the  acquaintance  of  Charlemagne,  he  was  retained  in  the 
service  of  that  ruler  for  the  rest  of  his  life.  He  gave  direction  to 
the  studies  of  the  monks  in  many  places,  and  founded  the  so-called 
Palatine  Schools  in  the  houses  of  the  princes,  which  long  rivalled 
the  cloister  establishments.  The  palace  of  Charlemagne  himself 
was  turned  into  an  academy  in  which  the  family  and  counsellors  of 
the  king  became  the  devoted  pupils  of  Alcuin.  About  A.  D.  796 
he  took  charge  of  the  abbey  of  St.  Martin  of  Tours,  which  he  suc- 
ceeded in  making  the  most  famous  school  of  his  age.  The  learning 
and  attainments  of  this  man  were  certainly  extraordinary  for  the 
time  in  which  he  lived.  Besides  numerous  treatises  on  theology, 
philosophy,  philology,  and  rhetoric,  and  several  poems,  he  compiled 
questions  and  answers  on  Genesis,  an  exposition  of  the  penitential 
psalms,  and  a  commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  John.  He  belongs, 
however,  to  the  class  of  catenists.  His  questions  on  Genesis  are 
taken  mainly  from  Jerome  and  Gregory,  and  his  comments  on  John 
are  avowedly  compiled  from  the  works  of  Augustine,  Ambrose, 
Gregory,  and  Bede.' 

'  The  works  of  Bede,  nearly  complete,  were  published  in  vols,  xc-xcv  of  Mignc's 
Latin  PatrolofciiP  rursiis  Completus  (Paris,  1850),  and  an  edition  of  his  historical  and 
theol()f,'iciil  works  l)y  Giles,  London,  1842,  1843,  12  vols. 

''Alcuin's  works  were  published  at  Paris,  1617,  in  one  vol.  fol.,  and  at  Ratisbon, 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  663 

Rhabanus  Maurus  was  a  disciple  of  Alcuin  at  Tours,  and  after- 
ward became  head  of  the  school  at  Fulda,  where  his  Rhabanus  Mau- 
fame  as  a  most  learned  and  successful  teacher  attracted  rus. 
to  him  many  scholars.  Among  these  were  not  a  few  of  the  sons  of 
the  nobility.  He  was  afterward  made  archbishop  of  Mentz.  His 
commentaries  cover  all  the  books  of  the  Bible,  and  have  obtained 
considerable  celebrity.  But  they  are  full  of  mystic  allegorizing, 
and  advocate  a  fourfold  sense,  namely,  the  historical,  the  allegor- 
ical, the  anagogical,  and  the  tropological  (see  above,  pp.  164,  165). 
He  also  is  essentially  a  catenist,  and  appropriates  the  larger  part 
of  his  comments  from  the  Greek  and  Latin  fathers.  His  writings 
served  to  bring  into  circulation  many  excellent  things  from  the 
more  ancient  times,  and  to  diffuse  a  warm,  practical.  Christian 
spirit.' 

Haymo,  teacher  at  Fulda,  abbot  of  Hirschfeld,  and  finally  bishop 
of  Halberstadt,  was  another  disciple  of  Alcuin,  and  is 
noted  for  the  compilation  of  Glosses  upon  the  Psalms, 
Canticles,  and  the  Prophets,  and  homilies  upon  the  Gospels  and 
Epistles.     The  Glosses  are  short  annotations  of  no  great   value, 
and  were   taken   mainly  from  the  fathers.*     "A  work,   however, 
w^hich  had  greater  influence  than  other  writings  of  this  kind  on  the 
following  centuries,  not  so  much  on  account  of  its  intrinsic  con- 
tents as  on  account  of  the  very  convenient  manner  in  which  it 
adapted  itself  to  the  ordinary  theological  wants  of  all  such  as  were 
not  profound  scholars,  was  the  short  explanatory  re-  waiafrid  stra- 
marks  which  Waiafrid  Strabo,  abbot  of  Reichenaix,  fol-   ''*'• 
lowing,  for  the  most,  his  teacher,  Rhabanus  Maurus,  compiled  on 
the  sacred  Scriptures,  and  which  formed  the  common  exegetical 
manual  of  the  Middle  Ages  known  as  the  Glossa  Ordinaria.      A 
man  of  far  greater  theological  importance,  as  an  expositor  of  Scrip- 
ture, was  Christian  Druthmar,  in  the  ninth  century,  who  had  re- 
ceived his  education  in  the  French  monastery  of  Corbie. 
TT     ^  ■   •  f     ^       -KT  Druthmar. 

He  first  gave  lectures  on  the  exposition   oi   the  JNew 

Testament  to  the  young  monks  in  the  monasteries  of  Stavelo  and 

Malmedy,  in  the  diocese  of  Liege.     In  this  way  he  was  led  to  write 

out,  as  he  had  been  invited  to  do,  an  elaborate  commentary  on  the 

Gospel  of  Matthew;  and  it  is  singular  to  observe,  in  an  interpreter 

I'FVV,  in  2  vols.  fol.  Comp.  Rosenmiiller,  Historia  Interpretatlonis  Librorum  Sacro- 
rum,  vol.  V,  pp.  109-122. 

'  The  works  of  Rhabanus  Maurus  were  published  at  Cologne,  in  162*7,  in  6  vols.  fol. ; 
also  in  Migne's  Latin  Patrologise  Cursus  Completus,  vols,  cvii-cxii.  Comp.  Rosen- 
miiller, Historia  Interpretationis,  vol.  v,  pp.  123-134. 

-  Haymo's  writings  are  published  in  vols,  cxvi-cxviii  of  Migne's  Latin  Patrologise 
Cursus  Completus, 


664  HISTORY    OF 

of  Scripture  belonging  to  these  times,  the  revival  of  the  hermeneu- 
tical  principles  of  the  Antiochian  school,  which  direction  in  favour 
of  the  grammatical  interpretation  of  the  Bible  no  doubt  actpiired 
for  him  the  surname  of  Gramraaticus.  lie  declared  himself,  in  the 
preface  to  this  commentary,  opposed  to  a  onesided,  arbitrary,  mys- 
tical exposition  of  the  Bible,  and  maintains  that  the  spiritual  ex- 
planation of  Scripture  presupposes  the  exploration  of  the  literal 
historical  sense."  ' 

■Other  distinguished  catenists  of  the  ninth  century  were  Claudius,, 
catenistsofthe  l^ishop  of  Turin,  sometimes  called  the  first  Protestant 
ninth  century,  reformer  because  of  his  vigorous  opposition  to  numer- 
ous Romish  superstitions;  Sedulius  and  Florus  Magister,  who  pre- 
pared Collectanea  on  all  the  epistles  of  Paul ;  Rcmigius,  whose 
compilations  extend  over  the  Psalms  and  eleven  of  the  Minor 
Prophets ;  Smaragdus,  who  wrote  on  the  Gospels  and  Epistles ;  and 
Paschasius  Radbert,  who  is  especially  famous  for  originating  the 
doctrine  of  transubstantiation.^ 

The  tenth  century  was  an  age  of  barbarism  and  almost  universal 
ignorance,  but  near  its  close  we  meet  with  the  most  dis- 

CEcumenius.       .  •ii/.ni  •  tt^  .  i., 

tinguished  or  all  the  catenists,  the  Byzantme  bishop, 
CEcumenius,  whose  elaborate  commentaries,  compiled  mainly  from 
Chrysostora,  cover  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament.  Though 
taking  the  expositions  of  others,  and  stringing  them  together  Avith- 
out  any  system  or  logical  order,  he  occasionally  expresses  his  own 
independent  judgment.  Inasmuch  as  he  uses  Chrysostora's  works^ 
as  his  principal  source,  his  method  of  interpretation  is  the  literal  or 
grammatical,  but  he  also  quotes  the  comments  of  the  two  Gregories,. 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  Basil,  Isidore,  Methodius,  Photius,  Athanasius, 
and  Theodoret.^ 

Among  the  catenists  of  the  eleventh  century  Theophylact  of 
Bulgaria  is  the   most  celebrated.     He  wrote   commen- 
taries on  Hosea,  Jonah,  Micah,  Nahum,  Habakkuk,  the 
Gospels,  the  Acts,  and  the  Epistles.     His  notes  on  the  prophets  are 
of  little  value,  but  those  on  the  New  Testament  have  always  been 
held  in  high  estimation."     Although  the  works  of  Chrysostom  are 

'  Neander,  History  of  Christian  Religion  and  Church,  vol.  iii,  pp.  458,  459.  Druth- 
mar's  Commentary  on  Matthew  was  published  at  Strasburg,  1514,  and  also  with  that 
on  Luke  and  John  in  the  xvth  vol.  of  the  Maxima  Bibliotheca  Patrum  (Lyons,  1627). 
Strabo's  Glossa  Ordinaria  have  been  published  in  many  editions.  Latest  ed.  vols,  cxiii 
and  cxiv  of  Migne's  Latin  Patrology. 

^  The  works  of  most  of  these  catenists  may  be  found  in  Migne's  Latin  Patrologisfr 
Cur.sus  Completus ;  but  some  are  still  in  manuscript. 

'  The  commentaries  of  O^^cumenius  were  published  in  two  vols,  folio,  Paris,  1031. 

*  Comp.  Rosenmiillcr,  Ili.st  Interpretationis  Librorum  Sacrorum,  vol.  iv,  pp.  286-316» 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  665 

the  chief  source  of  his  extracts,  he  occasionally  expresses  his  dissenii 
from  his  views,  and  shows  more  independence  than  most  of  the 
catenists.  "  The  circumstance  of  the  extracts  being  taken  from 
Chrysostom,"  says  Davidson,  "  is  rather  a  commendation  than 
otherwise ;  for  thus  the  time  of  the  student  who  desires  to  know 
the  sentiments  of  the  Constantinopolitan  archbishop  is  saved.  The 
interpretations  are  here  exhibited  in  shorter  compass  than  in  the 
vokiminous  works  of  the  original  author.  We  would  therefore 
recommend  the  commentaries  of  Theophylact  to  the  biblical  stu- 
dent. They  may  be  fairly  classed  with  those  of  CEcumenius.  Both 
follow  the  grammatical  m^ethod  of  exposition;  both  are  founded 
upon  Chrysostom  more  than  any  or  all  of  the  other  fathers.  We 
prefer  the  simplicity  and  brevity  of  Theophylact  to  the  profuseness 
of  CEcumenius." ' 

Other  exegetical  compilers  of  the  eleventh  century  are  Lanfranc, 
who  wrote  glosses  on  the  Pauline  epistles,  taken  mainly   ^    , 

°  .  .  Lanfranc,    Ni- 

from  Ambrose  and  Augustine;  and  Nicetas,  arch-  cetas, and wii- 
bishop  of  Heraclea,  in  Thrace,  the  author  of  a  useful  ®^^™' 
commentary  on  Job,  taken  mostly  from  Olympiodorus,  but  alsa 
making  free  use  of  many  other  writers.'*  Mention  should  also  be 
made  of  Willeram,  abbot  of  Ebersberg,  in  Bavaria,  who  was  much 
devoted  to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures,  and  composed  a  double 
paraphrase  of  Solomon's  Song,  one  in  Latin  hexameter  verse,  an- 
other in  prose  in  the  language  of  the  ancient  Franks. 

In  the  early  part  of  the  twelfth  century  flourished  Rupert,  abbot 
of  Deutz,  probably  the  most  prolific  Avriter  of  his  time,  Rupert,  peter 
and  greatly  devoted  to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures.  Euthymfuszf - 
His  exegetical  works  are  an  abridgment  of  Greg-  abenus. 
cry's  Moralia  on  Job,  and  commentaries  on  the  Song  of  Solomon, 
Ecclesiastes,  the  Minor  Proi^hets,  the  Gospel  of  John,  and  the 
Apocalypse.^  About  this  time  appeared  also  Peter  Lombard,  the 
noted  scholastic  divine,  who  wrote  a  commentary  on  the  PsalmSj 
and  Collectanea  on  the  Pauline  epistles,  gathered  chiefly  from  the 
works  of  Jerome,  Ambrose,  and  Augustine.^  More  valuable  are 
the  compilations  of  Euthymius  Zigabenus,  a  Greek  monk  of  Con- 
stantinople, on  the  Psalms,  the  Gospels,  and  the  Epistles.     They 

'  Sacred  Hermeneutics,  p.  170.  The  finest  edition  of  Theophylact  is  that  published 
at  Venice,  1754-63,  4  vols.  fol. 

^  Lanfranc's  works  were  edited  by  Giles,  2  vols.  8vo,  Oxford,  1844,  1845,  and 
Nicetas'  Catena  on  Job  appeared  in  London,  1637. 

^  Rupert's  complete  works  were  published  at  Venice,  1751,  4  vols.  fol. 

*  His  complete  works  have  been  published  in  many  editions;  the  first,  at  Nurem- 
berg, 1478. 


ma  HISTORY   OF 

are  taken  mostly  from  the  works  of  Chrysostom,  and  follow  his 
grammatical  method  of  exposition.' 

It  was  in  the  twelfth  century  that  the  Abbot  Joachim  put  forth 
his  Exposition  of  the  Apocalypse,  in  which  he  maintains 
that  the  divine  government  of  the  world  is  arranged  in 
three  great  icons,  or  disi^ensational  periods:  the  first,  extending 
from  the  creation  until  the  incarnation  of  Christ,  is  the  reign  of  the 
Father;  the  second,  is  the  reign  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  is  denoted  by 
the  twelve  hundred  and  sixty  days  mentioned  in  Rev.  xi,  3 ;  xii,  G, 
each  day  representing  a  year;  the  third,  is  the  reign  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  to  begin  in  the  year  A.  D.  1260,  during  which  mankind, 
having  been  carnal  under  the  Father,  half  carnal  and  half  spiritual 
under  the  Son,  Avill  become  altogether  spiritual.  He  also  wrote  a 
Avork  on  the  Harmony  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  and  there 
are  commentaries  bearing  his  name  on  most  of  the  Prophets.'^ 

Thomas  Aquinas,  the  distinguished  theologian  known  as  "the 
Thomas  Aqui-  Angelical  Doctor,"  has  left  among  his  voluminous  writ- 
nas.  ings  expositions  of  Job,  the  Psalms,  Canticles,  Isaiah, 

Jeremiah,  and  the  Gospel  of  John.  More  important  than  any  of 
these,  however,  is  his  Catena  Aurea  on  the  Four  Evangelists  and 
the  Epistles  of  Paul,  which  presents  in  an  abridged  form  the  com- 
ments of  Augustine,  Bede,  Alcuin,  Haymo,  Rhabanus  Maurus,  and. 
others.  The  name  of  each  author  from  whom  he  quotes  is  given  at 
the  end  of  the  quotation.  His  works  are  marked  with  numerous 
subtleties  peculiar  to  the  schoolmen,  and  are  of  little  value  in  the 
interpretation  of  the  Scriptures.  In  Aquinas  the  scholastic  phi- 
losophy of  the  Middle  Ages  reached  its  culmination,  but  exegesis 
made  no  real  advance.^  Associated  with  him  in  scholastic  theology 
was  his  contemporary,  Bonaventura,  called  "the  Seraphic 
Doctor."  He  also  wrote  expositions  of  various  books  of 
Scripture,  as  the  Psalms,  Ecclesiastes,  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah, 
and  portions  of  the  Gospels,  but  his  exegesis  abounds  with  farfetched 
and  worthless  speculations,  and  in  some  instances  assumes  a  seven- 
fold sense,  the  historical,  the  allegorical,  the  mystical,  the  moral, 
the  symbolical,  the  synecdochical,  and  the  hyperbolical.  The  first 
four  of  these  senses  are  supposed  to  be  indicated  by  the  four  feet 

1  His  works  are  given  in  Migne's  Greek  Patrologiaj  Cursus  Completus,  vols,  cxxx, 
cxxxi. 

"  His  Exposition  of  the  Apocalypse  has  been  often  printed,  ami  all  liis  works  were 
Iiul)lislic(l  at  Venice  in  1519-24,  and  at  Cologne  in  1577. 

^  The  works  of  Aquinas  have  been  published  separately  in  many  editions;  best  edi- 
tion of  his  complete  works  in  28  vols.  4to.  Venice,  1775.  An  English  translation 
of  his  Catena  Aurea  was  published  at  Oxford  in  1845. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION  667 

of  the  table  which  the  psalmist  speaks  of  as  prepared  for  him  in 
the  presence  of  his  enemies  (Psa.  xxiii,  5),  and  the  whole  seven 
correspond  with  the  seals  of  the  Apocalypse.  His  comments  on  the 
Gospels  exhibit  much  better  judgment/ 

To  this  same  class  of  extreme  mystical  interpreters  belong  the  Car- 
dinal Hugo  de  St.  Caro  and  Albert,  bishop  of  Ratisbon.  ^^^^  ^nd  ai- 
The  former  of  these  is  chiefly  famous  for  his  revision  of  ^ert. 
the  text  of  the  Vulgate,  and  his  concordance  of  the  same,  with  all 
the  Avords  of  this  Latin  version  arranged  in  alphabetical  ordeh  In 
connexion  with  this  work  he  divided  the  Bible  into  chapters,  and 
also  wrote  a  brief  commentary  on  the  whole.  This  last-named 
work  maintains  a  fourfold  sense,  the  literal,  the  allegorical,  the 
moral,  and  the  anagogical.^  The  expository  works  of  Albert,  some- 
times called,  on  account  of  his  vast  erudition,  Albert  the  Great,  con- 
sist of  commentaries  on  the  Psalms,  Lamentations,  the  twelve  Minor 
Prophets,  the  four  Gospels,  and  the  Apocalypse.  His  annotations 
are  full  o£  mystical  allegorizing  and  scholastic  speculation.^ 

Nicholas  de  Lyra  flourished  at  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth 
century.  In  addition  to  the  usual  studies  of  his  age  he  Nicholas  de 
acquired  a  thorough  knowledge  of  Hebrew,  a  rare  ac-  ^yra. 
complishment  for  a  Christian,  and  his  great  learning  and  useful 
writings  secured  him  the  friendship  of  the  most  illustrious  men  of 
his  times,  and  the  title  of  the  "plain  and  useful  doctor."  His 
greatest  work  is  entitled  Continual  Comments,  or  Brief  Annotations 
on  the  whole  Bible  (Postillie  perpetuae,  seu  brevia  commentaria  in 
universa  Biblia),  and  exhibits  a  great  advance  upon  most  of  the 
exegesis  of  the  Middle  Ages.  For  although  he  recognises  a  four- 
fold sense,  as  shown  in  the  well-known  lines, 

Litera  gesta  docet,  quid  credas  allegoria, 
Moralis  quid  agus,  quo  tendas  anagogia, 

he  gives  decided  preference  to  the  literal  sense,  and  in  his  exposi- 
tions shows  comparatively  little  regard  for  any  other.  He  frankly 
acknowledges  his  indebtedness  to  the  learned  Hebrew  exegetes, 

'  Bonaventura's  works  were  published  in  13  vols.  4to.  Venice,  l^SL  His  ex- 
egetical  writings  are  contained  in  vols,  i  and  ii. 

^  Hugo's  Postillae  on  the  whole  Bible  were  published  at  Basle  in  1487,  and  his  Con- 
cordance at  Avignon  in  1786,  2  vols.  4to.  The  word  postilla,  which  came  to  be  used 
in  median-al  Latin  for  a  running  commentary,  means  literally  that  which  follows  after, 
and  arose  from  the  habit  of  delivering  homilies  or  expository  remarks  immediately  af- 
ter the  reading  of  the  text  of  Scripture.  Thus,  too,  the  comments  in  a  written  volume, 
■which  followed  after  the  text,  which  was  placed  first,  came  to  be  known  as  postillae. 

^  Albert's  exegetical  writings  are  published  in  vols,  vii-x  of  the  edition  of  all  his 
wcrks  in  21  vols.  fol.     Lyons,  1051. 


668  HISTORY   OF 

especially  Rabbi  Solomon  Isaac  (Rashi),  whose  sober  methods  of  in- 
terpretation he  generally  followed.  The  influence  his  writings  had 
on  Luther  and  other  reformers  is  celebrated  in  the  familiar  couplet: 

'  Si  Lyra  non  lyrasset, 

Lutherus  uou  saltasset. 

His  comments  on  the  New  Testament  are  less  valuable  than  those 
on  the  Old,  and  follow  closely  Augustine  and  Aquinas.  He  was 
ignorant  of  the  Greek  language,  and  based  his  expositions  on  the 
text  of  the  Vulgate.*  But  his  great  Postillae  perpetuae  accom- 
plished much  in  preparing  the  way  of  a  more  thorough  grammatical 
interpretation  of  the  Bible.''  His  exegetical  principles  were  op- 
posed by  Paulus  Burgensis,  who  thought  that  Lyra  had  given 
undue  emphasis  to  the  literal  sense  to  the  neglect  of  the  other 
meanings  which  he  allowed.  Lyra  was  in  turn  defended  by  Mat- 
thias Doring,  a  Franciscan  monk.  These  polemical  treatises  con- 
tain nothing  of  value. 

Along  with  Lyra  we  may  appropriately  mention  John  Wycliffe, 

the  first  English  translator  of  the  Bible,  and  the  "  morn- 
•  Wycliffe.  . 

ing  star  of  the  Reformation."     His  translation  of  the 

entire  Scriptures,  including  also  the  Apocrypha,  was  made  from  the 
Vulgate,  and  is  of  little  or  no  intrinsic  value,  having  been  super- 
seded by  more  accurate  English  versions,  but  its  influence  at  the 
time  of  its  appearance,  and  for  a  long  period  afterward,  was  incal- 
culable. It  placed  the  divine  Word  within  reach  of  multitudes  of 
the  common  people,  and  set  them  thinking  for  themselves. 

John  IIuss,  the  illustrious  Bohemian  reformer,  who  suffered  mar- 
tyrdom at  Constance  in  1415,  was  ecreatlv  influenced  in 

JOhnHUSS.  -•'.  .  -  ,  .       .  ^>     TTX  !•«.  TX 

his  views  by  the  writmgs  or  V\  yclin;e.  He  wrote  an 
exposition  of  the  Gospels,  compiled  mostly  from  the  Latin  fathers, 
and  a  commentary  on  the  Catholic  Epistles,  and  a  portion  of  First 
Corinthians.  He  follows  the  grammatical  sense,  but  aims  espe- 
cially to  bring  out  the  doctrinal  and  moral  lessons  of  the  sacred 

text.       John    Wessel,    whose   life    extended    over   the 

John  Wessel.  ,.     i        .^  i 

greater  part  of  the  fifteenth  century,  was  another  pre- 
cursor of  the  Reformation,  and  is  worthy  of  our  notice  because  of 
his  holding  up  the  Scriptures  in  that  dark  age  as  the  final  appeal  in 
matters  of  faith.  So  far  as  his  writings  deal  with  expositions  of 
the  Bible  ho  follows  the  historico-theological  method,  and  main- 
tains the  simple  and  obvious  sense  of  tlie  text.     Tradition,  how- 

'  Comp.   Meyer,   Geschiehte  der  Schrifterklarung  poit  tier  Wicderherstellung  der 
Wisscnscliiiften,  vol.  i,  pp.  loO-l'JO. 

'  The  best  edition  of  Lyra's  Postillte  is  that  pubiislieil  at  Antwerp,  lf>34,  (>  vols.  fol. 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  66J> 

ever,  was  not  altogether  rejected,  and  he  showed  great  deference 
to  the  rule  or  analogy  of  faith. 

A  very  different  style  of  interpretation  was  that  maintained  by- 
John  Charlier  Gerson,  who  co-operated  with  the  Coun- 
cil of  Constance  in  the  condemnation  and  martyrdom 
of  IIuss.  Gerson,  however,  laboured  earnestly  for  the  reform  of  the 
Church,  and  thereby  provoked  the  enmity  of  many  leading  men  of 
his  time.  He  wrote  a  docti'inal  exposition  of  the  Seven  Penitential 
Psalms,  and  a  treatise  on  the  Song  of  Songs.  In  other  works  of 
his  production  he  advocates  the  literal  sense  of  Holy  Scripture,  but 
insists,  like  a  true  papist,  that  this  sense  is  to  be  determined,  not 
by  the  judgment  of  the  individual  interpreter,  but  by  the  authority 
of  the  Church. 

Lorenzo  (or  Laurentius)  Valla,  an  Italian  scholar,  was  one  of  the 
most  celebrated  leaders  in  the  revival  of  literature,  Laurentius 
and,  as  Hase  concisely  puts  it,  "  first  developed  the  '^^^i^- 
laws  of  a  true  Latinity,  and  was  induced  by  the  artistic  refinement 
which  it  jn'oduced  decidedly  to  pronounce  the  scholastic  style  ab- 
surd, by  the  })hilological  knowledge  it  afforded  to  explain  and 
illustrate  the  original  text  of  the  New  Testament,  and  by  the  his- 
torical criticism  it  fostered  to  give  judgment  against  the  fables  of 
the  hierarchy."  '  He  wrote,  besides  other  important  works,  Anno- 
tations on  the  New  Testament,  which  entitle  him  to  the  honour  of 
being  the  best  interpreter  of  the  fifteenth  century.  He  urged  the 
importance  of  understanding  the  original  language  of  the  New 
Testament,  and  showed  that  the  Vulgate  text  must  be  amended  by 
the  Greek  original.  He  opposed  the  traditional  follies  of  the 
Church,  refused  to  allow  the  scholastic  philosophy  to  control  bibli- 
cal exposition,  and  adhered  closely  to  the  grammatical  sense.  He 
was  pre-eminently  a  critic  and  grammarian,  and  his  system  of  in- 
terpretation may  best  be  designated  as  philological.^  He  paid  little 
or  no  attention  to  the  theological  and  normal  teachings  of  the  Bible, 
and  while,  doubtless,  erring  in  this  extreme,  his  labours  and  influ- 
ence produced  a  wholesome  and  much-needed  reaction  against 
superstition  and  mystic  scholasticism,  and  in  favour  of  a  grammat- 
ical interpretation  of  the  Scriptures. 

With  the  general  revival  of  learning,  and  the  knowledge  of 
Grecian  antiquity  which  was  introduced  by  Grecian  refugees 
into  Southern   and  Western    Europe,   and   prepared   the   way  for 

'  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  translated  by  Blumenthal  and  Wing,  p.  32*7. 
New  York,  1855. 

"  Comp.  Meyer,  Geschichte  der  Schrif terkarung  seit  der  Wiederherstellung  der  Wis- 
Benschaften,  vol.  i,  pp.  154r-166. 


670  HISTORY   OF 

the  great  Protestant  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century,  there 
Re\'ivai  of  learn-  was  a  notable  breaking  away  from  mediaeval  super- 
cre^ed  study  of  ^^ition,  and  an  increasing  regard  for  the  study  of  the 
the  Bible.  Holy  Scriptures.     The  Church  of  Rome  was  hostile  to 

these  tendencies.  "  The  opposition  of  the  Church  to  primitive  Chris- 
tianity," says  Hase,  "was  evinced  in  the  fact  that  when  it  per- 
ceived the  almost  universal  use  of  the  sacred  wi-itings  by  parties 
hostile  to  it  the  hierarchy  ventured  more  and  more  decidedly  to 
prevent  the  perusal  of  the  Scriptures  in  the  language  of  the  people, 
and  to  subject  every  translation  to  an  ecclesiastical  censorship. 
In  spite  of  all  their  efforts,  however,  after  the  middle  of  the 
fifteenth  century,  the  wishes  of  the  people  and  the  power  of  the 
press  prevailed,  and  fourteen  editions  of  a  translation  in  the  high 
German,  all  founded  upon  the  Vulgate,  though  none  were  in  the 
genuine  language  of  the  people,  are  evidence  to  the  extent  to  which 
it  was  used."  ^  The  first  notable  specimen  of  printing  with  metal 
types  was  an  edition  of  the  Latin  Vulgate  in  two  folio  volumes 
(somewhere  betAveen  1450  and  1455).  The  art  of  printing  became 
from  that  time  a  most  important  aid  in  the  diffusion  of  knowledge. 
At  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century,  but  hardly  to  be 
classed  with  the  great  reformers,  flourished  two  cele- 

John  Reuchlin.    ,  t         i     i  ^  i  -i  t      i    t  •  i 

brated  scholars  to  whom  biblical  literature  is  greatly 
indebted,  Reuchlin  and  Erasmus.  John  Reuchlin  was  recognised 
as  a  leader  of  the  German  Humanists,  and  was  particularly  famous 
for  his  devotion  to  the  study  of  Hebrew.  He  justly  deserves  the 
title  of  father  of  Hebrew  learning  in  the  Christian  Church.  He 
far  surpassed  the  Jews  of  his  time  in  the  knowledge  of  their  own 
language,  and  published,  besides  many  other  works,  a  treatise  on 
the  Rudiments  of  Hebrew,  another  on  the  Accents  and  Orthog- 
raphy of  the  HebreAV  Language,  and  a  Grammatical  Interpretation 
of  the  Seven  Penitential  Psalms.  He  was  also  acknowledged  every- 
where as  an  authority  in  Latin  and  Greek,  as  well  as  in  Hebrew, 
and  the  most  learned  men  of  his  age  sousrht  his  instruction  and 
counsel.  His  great  services  in  the  cause  of  biblical  learning  led 
men  to  say  of  him,  "  Jerome  is  born  again." 

Desiderius  Erasmus  was  by  his  wit,  wisdom,  culture,  and  varied 
erudition  the  foremost  representative,  and.  one  might 
say,  the  embodiment,  of  Humanism.  He  and  Reuchlin 
were  called  the  "  Eyes  of  Germany."  Erasmus  became  early  fas- 
cinated with  the  ancient  classics,  translated  several  Greek  authors 
into  Latin,  and  edited  numerous  editions  of  their  works.  He  also 
edited  a  number  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  fathers.     Without  any 

'  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  p.  332. 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  C71 

such  deep  religious  experience  and  profound  convictions  as  Luther, 
and  possessed  of  no  such  massive  intellect  as  Melanchthon,  he  was 
noted  rather  for  versatility  of  genius  and  prodigious  literary  indus- 
try. Nevertheless,  he  was  one  of  the  most  distinguished  precur- 
sors of  the  Reformation,  and  it  was  truly  said :  "  Erasmus  laid  the 
egg;  Luther  hatched  it."  He  appears  to  have  turned  his  attention 
to  biblical  studies  about  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
and  published  in  1505  a  new  edition  of  Lorenzo  Valla's  Remarks 
on  the  New  Testament.  He  edited  and  published  in  1516  the  first 
edition  of  the  Greek  Testament.  It  was  printed  in  folio,  accom- 
panied with  an  elegant  Latin  version,  and  various  readings  from 
several  manuscripts,  the  works  of  the  fathers,  and  the  Vulgate. 
This  first  edition  was  hastily  prepared,  precipitated  rather  than 
edited,  as  Erasmus  himself  wrote,  in  order  to  bring  it  out  in  ad- 
vance of  Cardinal  Ximenes'  Complutensian  Polyglot,  which  did 
not  appear  until  15  20.  Erasmus  afterward  wrote  and  published 
Annotations  on  the  New  Testament,  and  also  Paraphrases  on  the 
whole  New  Testament  except  the  Book  of  Revelation,  which  were 
so  highly  esteemed  in  England  that  it  was  required  of  every  par- 
ish church  to  possess  a  copy  of  the  English  translation.  These 
publications  introduced  a  new  era  in  biblical  learning,  and  went  far 
toward  supplanting  the  scholasticism  of  the  previous  ages  by  better 
methods  of  theological  study.' 

Jacques  Lefevre,  born  at  Etaples  (about  1455),  and  commonly 
known  as  Jacobus  Faber  Stapulensis,  can  hardly  be 
ranked  with  the  great  Reformers,  and  yet  in  fact  he  was 
the  father  of  the  Reformation  in  France.  He,  however,  never  left 
the  Roman  Church,  and  we  may  properly  notice  his  work  in  bibli- 
cal literature  as  belonging  to  the  transition  period  which  prepared 
the  way  for  the  triumph  of  Protestantism.  In  1509  he  published 
his  Psalteriura  Quintuplex,  or  Psalms,  in  five  versions,  accompanied 
with  short  annotations.  He  afterward  published  commentaries  on 
the  Psalms,  the  four  Gospels,  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  and  the  Catholic 
Epistles,  But  his  most  important  work  was  his  French  translation 
of  the  Bible,  which  was  the  basis  of  the  later  work  of  Olivetan. 
The  New  Testament  part  appeared  at  Paris  in  1523,  and  the  Old 
Testament  at  Antwerp  in  1538. 

Belonging  to  this  same  transition  period,  and  -worthy  of  a  passing 
notice,   we  find  the  Italian,  Pico  Mirandula  (Giovanni 
Pico  della  Mirandula),  who  was  learned   in   Hebrew, 
Chaldee,  and  Arabic,  as  well  as  Greek  and  Latin,  and  wrote  ah 

'  Erasmus'  works  have  been  printed  in  many  forms.     The  best  edition  is  that  of 
Le  Clerc,  in  11  vols,  folio.     Leyden,  1703. 


€72  HISTORY   OF 

allegorical  exposition  of  Genesis,  a  work  of  no  value,  and  a  com- 
mentary on  the  Lord's  Prayer. 

Mention  should  also  be  made  of  Sanctes  Pagninus,  an  Italian 
Sanctes  Pag-  monk,  distinguished  for  his  knowledge  of  Latin,  Greek, 
ninus.  Arabic,  Chaldee,  and  Hebrew,  especially  the  last.     He 

published  a  Hebrew  Lexicon,  and  an  Introduction  to  the  Mystical 
Meanings  of  Holy  Scripture,  in  which  he  explained  parts  of  Job, 
Solomon's  Song,  and  the  seventh  chapter  of  First  Corinthians  in  a 
very  fanciful  and  cabalistic  manner.  His  most  useful  work,  how- 
ever, is  his  new  Latin  version  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  the 
first  Latin  Bible  in  which  the  verses  of  each  chapter  were  num- 
bered as  in  the  original.  This  translation  is  remarkable  for  its 
■close  adherence  to  the  Hebrew  idiom.  He  also  composed  Institutes 
of  the  Hebrew  language,  and  a  catena  of  Greek  and  Latin  writers 
■on  the  Pentateuch. 

The  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century  was  notable  for  the  grow- 
The  nrst  Poly-  i^^g  interest  taken  in  the  study  of  the  ancient  tongues, 
sriots.  Q^j^({  ^jjg  publication  (at  Genoa  in  1516)  of  the  Polyglot 

Psalter  of  Justinian  (Giustiniani),  a  bishop  of  Corsica,  and  the  great 
Complutensian  Polyglot,  commenced  in  1502  under  the  auspices  of 
Cardinal  Ximenes  of  Toledo,  completed  in  1517,  and  published  in 
1522.  The  editors  of  this  work  were  Demetrius  Ducas,  a  Greek  by 
birth,  and  a  teacher  in  the  University  of  Alcala;  Anthony  of  Neb- 
rissa,  a  Spanish  theologian,  professor  in  the  University  of  Alcala, 
and  author  of  several  valuable  works;  Stunica,  noted  for  skill  in 
the  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Latin  languages;  Ferdinand  Nonnius,  a 
distinguished  orientalist;  Alphonsus,  a  physician  of  Alcala,  Alphon- 
sus  Zamora,  and  Paul  Coronel;  these  last  three  converted  Jews, 
who  were  all  proficient  in  Hebrew  and  in  rabbinical  learning. 
Most  of  these  editors  of  the  Complutensian  Polyglot  were  also 
noted  for  other  works  in  biblical  literature  and  philology. 

The  publication  of  the  whole  Bible  and  separate  parts  of  it  in 
Latin,  Greek,  Hebrew,  Chaldee,  Arabic,  and  Syriac  prepared  the 
way  for  the  more  accurate  and  scientific  exposition  of  the  following 
centuries.  The  fetters  of  ignox'ance  were  broken,  a  widespread  love 
for  literature  and  learning  prevailed,  and  earnest  and  devout  stu- 
dents of  the  Scriptures  began  to  cultivate  a  more  thorough  and  use- 
ful system  of  interpretation. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  673 


CHAPTER   VI. 

EXEGESIS    OF    THE    REFORMATION. 

With  the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century  the  mind  of  Ger- 
many and  of  other  European  states  broke  away  from  The  Reformat 
the  ignorance  and  superstition  of  the  Middle  Ages,  the  |Ji°gVfa  better 
Holy  Scriptures  were  appealed  to  as  the  written  reve-  day. 
lation  of  God,  containing  all  things  necessary  to  salvation,  and  the 
doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  was  magnified  against  priestly 
absolution  and  the  saving  meritoriousness  of  works.  The  great 
commandino;  mind  and  leader  of  this  remarkable  movement  was 
Martin  Luther,  who,  in  October,  1517,  published  the  famous  theses 
which  were  like  the  voice  of  a  trumpet  sounding  forth  the  begin- 
ning of  a  better  day.  Five  years  later  he  put  forth  his  German 
translation  of  the  New  Testament.  This  was  one  of  the  most  valu- 
able services  of  his  life,  for  it  gave  to  his  people  the  holy  oracles  in 
the  simple,  idiomatic,  and  racy  language  of  common  life,  and  enabled 
them  to  read  for  themselves  the  teachings  of  Christ  and  Luther's  Ger- 
the  apostles.  It  was  followed  by  successive  portions  of  ^^^  ^^^i^- 
the  Old  Testament  until,  in  1534,  the  whole  Bible  was  completed 
and  became  of  incalculable  influence  in  effecting  the  triumph  of 
Protestantism.  The  arduous  effort  of  Luther  to  make  his  transla- 
tion of  the  Bible  as  accurate  as  possible  went  far  toward  the  estab- 
lishing of  sound  methods  of  criticism  and  exegesis.  His  helps  in 
this  great  enterprise  consisted  of  Erasmus'  edition  of  the  New 
Testament,  the  Septuagint,  the  Vulgate,  a  few  of  the  Latin  fathers, 
and  an  imperfect  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew.  He  also  received  val- 
uable assistance  from  Melanchthon,  Bugenhagen,  Jonas,  Cruciger, 
and  several  learned  rabbis.  He  spent  twelve  of  the  best  years  of 
his  life  upon  this  monumental  work.  Portions  of  the  original  auto- 
graph are  still  preserved  in  the  royal  library  of  Berlin,  and  show 
with  what  anxious  care  he  sought  to  make  the  version  as  faithful 
as  possible.  Sometimes  three  or  four  different  forms  mg  exegeticai 
of  expression  were  written  down  before  he  determined  """o^ks. 
which  one  to  adopt.  Luther's  commentary  on  the  Galatians,  which 
has  been  translated  into  English,  and  published  in  many  editions, 
was  characterized  by  himself  as  being  very  "  plentiful  in  words." 
It  is  an  elaborate  treatise  adapted  for  use  as  public  lectures  and  devo- 
tional reading,  and  is  particularly  notable  for  its  ample  exposition 
43 


674  HISTORY   OF 

of  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith.  Lutlier  also  prepared 
notes  on  Genesis,  the  Psalms,  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  the  Gospel 
of  John,  and  other  portions  of  the  New  Testament.'  His  knowl- 
edge of  Hebrew  and  Greek  was  limited,  and  he  sometimes  mistook 
the  meaning  of  the  sacred  writer,  but  his  religious  intuitions  and 
deep  devotional  spirit  enabled  him  generally  to  apprehend  the  true 
sense  of  Scripture. 

Although  Luther  occupies  the  foremost  place  among  the  reform- 
ers, he  was  far  surpassed  in  scholarship  and  learninir  bv 

Melanchthon.      t^,  ...     ,,   ,         .    ,     ^     .  ,  ,       .  \  .  o      J 

Phihp  Melanchthon,  in  whom  he  found  an  indispensable 
friend  and  helper,  in  temperament  and  manners  the  counterpart  of 
himself.  Luther  may  be  compared  with  Paul,  Avhose  bold  and  fear- 
less spirit  he  admirably  represented;  Melanchthon  exhibited  rather 
the  tender  and  loving  spirit  of  John.  Melanchthon  appears  to  have 
been  favoured  Avith  every  opportunity  and  means  of  education 
which  that  age  afforded.  He  was  regarded  as  a  prodigy  of  ancient 
learning,  especially  skilled  in  the  knowledge  of  Greek,  a  pupil  of 
Reuchlin,  and  a  friend  of  Erasmus,  both  of  whom  extolled  his 
remarkable  talents  and  ripe  scholarship.  His  thorough  acquaint- 
ance with  the  original  languages  of  the  Scriptures,  his  calm  judg- 
ment and  cautious  methods  of  procedure,  qualified  him  for  pre- 
eminence in  biblical  exegesis.  He  clearly  perceived  the  Hebraic 
character  of  the  New  Testament  Greek,  and  showed  the  importance 
of  the  study  of  Hebrew  even  for  the  exposition  of  the  Christian 
Scriptures.  As  an  aid  in  this  line  of  study  he  published  an  edition 
of  the  Septuagint.  Luther  listened  with  delight  to  his  expository 
lectures  on  Romans  and  Corinthians,  obtained  his  manuscript,  and 
sent  it  without  his  knowledge  to  the  printer.  On  its  appearance  he 
wrote  to  his  modest  friend  thus  characteristically:  "It  is  I  who  pub- 
lish this  commentary  of  yours,  and  I  send  yourself  to  you.  If  you 
are  not  satisfied  with  yourself  you  do  right;  it  is  enough  that  you 
please  us.  Yours  is  the  fault,  if  there  be  any.  AVhy  did  you  not 
publish  them  yourself  ?  Why  did  you  let  me  ask,  command,  and 
urge  you  to  publish  to  no  purpose  ?  This  is  my  defence  against 
you.  For  I  am  willing  to  rob  you  and  to  bear  the  name  of  a  thief. 
I  fear  not  your  complaints  or  accusations."* 

Melanchthon's  exegetical  lectures  embrace  Genesis,  the  Psalms, 
Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Lamentations,  Daniel,  Hag- 
gai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi,  of  the  Old  Testament;  and  Matthew, 

'  Luther's  exegetical  works  in  Latin,  edited  by  Elsperger,  Schmid,  and  Irmisclicr, 
were  published  at  Erlangon  in  23  vols.  I'inio,  1729-44;  in  German,  in  vols,  xxxiii-lii 
of  his  collected  works  as  edited  by  Irmischcr,  1843-53. 

"  Luther's  Briefe,  8eudschreibeu  u.  Cedenken,  ed.  De  Wette,  ii,  238.    Conip.  ii,  303. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  675 

John,  Romans,  Corinthians,  Colossians,  Timothy,  and  Titus,  of  the 
New  Testament.  Luther's  German  Bible  was  greatly  jjjg  exegeticai 
indebted  to  the  careful  revision  of  Melanchthon,  who  lectures. 
himself  translated  the  books  of  Maccabees.  Although  his  quiet, 
meditative  tendencies  led  him  at  times  into  allegorical  methods  of 
exegesis,  which  he  found  so  generally  adopted  by  the  fathers,  he 
followed  in  the  main  the  grammatico-historical  method,  was  care- 
ful to  trace  the  connexion  and  course  of  thought,  and  aimed  to  as- 
certain the  mind  of  the  Spirit  in  the  written  word.  His  celebrated 
Loci  Communes,  and  his  authorship  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  en- 
title him  to  rank  with  the  greatest  theologians  of  any  age  or  nation.' 

Similar  to  Luther  and  Melanchthon,  in  their  relations  to  one  an- 
othei",  wei'e  the  great  Swiss  reform  ei's,  Zwingle  and  CEco- 
lampadius.  Zwingle  was  inferior  to  Luther  in  depth 
and  genius,  but  his  superior  in  humanistic  culture  and  less  mys- 
tical in  his  nature.  He  wrote  scholia  on  Genesis,  Exodus, 
Isaiah,  and  Jeremiah,  and  also  on  the  Gospels.  There  is  yet  pre- 
served in  the  Zurich  library  his  manuscript  copy  in  Greek  of  the 
Epistles  of  Paul,  with  marginal  annotations  from  Erasmus,  Origen, 
Ambrose,  Jerome,  and  others.  He  made  extensive  use  of  the  Greek 
and  Roman  classics,  with  which  he  was  very  familiar,  forming  his 
style  after  those  ancient  models,  and  bringing  them  to  the  illustra- 
tion of  various  passages  of  Scripture.'' 

Q^colampadius   was  more  gentle  and  meditative  than   Zwingle, 
and  his  scholarship  was  more  varied  and  thorough.     In 

.  iii-i  ,.•  T  1        •       CEcolampadius. 

his  intellectual  habits,  love  ot  retirement,  and  academic 
tastes  he  greatlv  resembled  Melanchthon.  He  studied  under  Reuch- 
lin,  assisted  Erasmus  in  preparing  the  second  edition  of  his  Greek 
Testament,  and  became  distinguished  over  all  the  continent  for  his 
vast  erudition,  and  especially  for  his  proficiency  in  Hebrew  and  Greek. 
He  was  famous  as  a  preacher  and  expounder  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
While  professor  of  biblical  literature  in  the  University  of  Basle  his 
lecture  room  could  not  contain  the  crowds  of  students  and  citizens 
who  thronged  to  hear  him.  His  exegetical  works  consist  mainly 
of  commentaries  on  Genesis,  Job,  and  all  the  prophetical  books, 
(3  vols,  fol.,  1553-8),  and  are  of  considerable  value. 

Contemporary   with    Zwingle    and    CEcolampadius   was    Conrad 
Pellican,  for  thirty  years  professor  of  Hebrew  at  Zurich, 

''    •'  ^  ,  Pellican. 

where,  in  1527,  he  published  an  edition  of  the  Hebrew 

Bible  with  the  comments  of  Aben-Ezra  and  Salamon.      He  also 

'  Melanchthon's  works,  edited  by  Bretschneider  and  Bindseil,  form  28  vols,  of  tlie 
Corpus  Reformatorum.     Ilalle  and  Brunswick.      1834-60. 
^  His  works  were  publislied  at  Zurich  in  8  vols.,  1828-42. 


676  HISTORY  OF 

published  commentaries  on  all  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Test- 
aments, except  Jonah,  Zechariah,  and  the  Revelation.  His  method 
is  to  adhere  to  the  literal  sense,  amend  where  needed  the  Vulgate 
text,  and  make  considerable  use  of  rabbinical  authors,  with  whom 
he  appears  to  have  been  quite  familiar.  His  exegetical  writings 
served  a  useful  purpose  during  the  period  of  the  Reformation. 

Sebastian  Minister  identified  himself  with  the  Protestant  reform- 
Miinster  and  ^^'^f  ^'^^  showed  the  liveliest  sympathy  with  their  prin- 
ciarius.  ciples,  but  he  kept    aloof    from  all  their  controversies, 

and  gave  himself  up  to  the  quiet  study  of  Hebrew  and  other  oriental 
languages.  He  published  an  edition  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  with  a 
new  Latin  version  and  extensive  annotations  di-awn  mainly  from 
the  rabbinical  commentaries.  He  was  also  the  author  of  numerous 
works  on  Hebrew  and  Chaldee  grammar,  and  of  expositions  of  sev- 
eral books  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  have  been  printed  in  the 
Critici  Sacri.  Isidore  Clarius  belongs  to  this  same  period.  His 
principal  work  was  an  amended  edition  of  the  Latin  Vulgate, 
accompanied  by  annotations  taken  largely  from  Miinster.  John 
Draconites  also  acquired  reputation  as  a  biblical  scholar  by  his 
Biblia  Pentapla,  and  commentaries  on  various  portions  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments. 

Of  all  the  exegetes  of  the  period  of  the  Reformation  the  first 
place   must   unquestionably   be   given   to   John   Calvin, 

John  Calvin.        ,  i  •  i  i  t     -  •         .^    i  i 

whose  learning  was  ample,  whose  Latin  style  surpassed 
in  purity  and  elegance  that  of  any  writer  of  his  time,  and  whose 
intellect  was  at  once  acute  and  ])enetrating,  profound  and  compre- 
hensive. His  stern  views  on  predestination  are  too  often  ottensively 
prominent,  and  he  at  times  indulges  in  harsh  wofds  against  those 
who  differ  from  him  in  opinion.  In  textual  and  philological  criti- 
cism he  was  not  equal  to  Erasmus,  Melanchthon,  CEcolampadius,  or 
his  intimate  friend  Beza,  and  he  occasionally  falls  into  notably  in- 
correct interpretations  of  words  and  phrases;  but  as  a  whole,  his 
commentaries  are  justly  celebrated  for  clearness,  good  sense,  and 
masterly  apprehension  of  the  meaning  and  spirit  of  the  sacred 
Avriters.  With  the  exception  of  Judges,  Ruth,  Kings,  Esther,  Ezra, 
Nehemiah,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  Solomon's  Song,  and  the  Apoca- 
lypse, his  comments,  expository  lectures,  and  homilies  extend  over 
the  whole  Bible.  In  his  Preface  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  he 
maintains  that  the  chief  excellence  of  an  interpreter  is  a  pers])ii'u- 
ous  brevity  which  does  not  divert  the  reader's  thoughts  by  long 
and  prolix  discussions,  but  directly  lays  open  the  mind  of  the  sacred 
writer.  His  commentaries,  accordingly,  while  not  altogether  free 
from  blemishes,  exhibit  a  lKii»i)y  exegetical  tact,  a  ready  grasp  of 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  G77 

the  more  obvious  meaning  of  words,  and  an  admirable  regard  to 
the  context,  scope,  and  plan  of  the  author.  He  seldom  quotes  from 
other  commentators,  and  is  conspicuously  free  from  mystical,  alle- 
gorical, and  forced  methods  of  exposition.  His  exegesis  breathes 
everywhere — especially  in  the  Psalms — a  most  lively  religious  feel- 
ing, indicating  that  his  own  personal  experience  enabled  him  to 
penetrate  as  by  intuition  into  the  depths  of  meaning  treasured  in 
the  oracles  of  God.  "  In  the  Pauline  ejDistles,"  says  Tholuck,  "  he 
merges  himself  in  the  spirit  of  the  apostle,  and  becoming  one  with 
him,  as  every  one  clearly  feels,  he  deduces  everywhere  the  explana- 
tion of  that  whicli  is  particular  from  that  which  is  general,  and  is 
in  this  respect  to  be  compared  with  Chrysostom,  whose  rhetorical 
education,  however,  sometimes  exerted  a  bad  influence  upon  him. 
The  whole  history  of  the  New  Testament  becomes  in  his  hand  alive 
and  vivid.  He  lives  in  every  person  who  comes  forward,  either 
speaking  or  acting,  in  the  wicked  as  well  as  in  the  good ;  and  ex- 
plains every  discourse  from  the  circumstances,  and  from  the  soul  of 
him  who  speaks." ' 

Next  to  Calvin  we  may  appropriately  notice  his  intimate  friend 
and  fellow  reformer,  Theodore  Beza,  who  early  enioyed 

Theodore  6ez3> 

the  instruction  of  such  masters  as  Faber  (Stapulensis), 
Budseus,  and  John  Lascaris,  and  became  so  distinguished  as  an  apt 
and  brilliant  scholar  that  of  one  hundred,  who  with  him  received 
the  master's  degree,  he  stood  first.  He  lived  to  the  great  age  of 
eighty-six,  and  was  the  author  of  many  useful  works.  The  princi- 
pal monument  of  his  exegetical  skill  is  his  Latin  ti'anslation  of  the 
New  Testament,  with  full  annotations.^  He  was  a  consummate 
critic,  a  man  of  remarkable  quickness  and  versatility  of  intellect, 
and  widely  distinguished  for  his  profound  and  varied  learning.  His 
comments  are  unlike  those  of  Calvin  in  not  making  prominent 
the  religious  element  of  the  sacred  writings,  but  his  j)hilological 

'  The  Merits  of  Calvin  as  an  Interpreter  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Translated  from 
the  German  in  the  Biblical  Repository  for  July,  1832,  p.  562.  Comp.  Gotch  on  same 
subject  in  Kitto's  Journal  of  Sacred  Literature  for  1849,  p.  222.  Calvin's  works  were 
published  in  9  folio  vols.,  Amsterdam,  1671  (best  edition).  A  new  edition,  edited  by 
Baum,  Cunitz,  and  Reuss,  is  given  in  the  Corpus  Reformatorum,  Brunswick,  1863-82 
(yet  incomplete).  Tholuck's  edition  of  his  New  Testament  Commentaries,  in  V  vols. 
8vo,  is  a  very  convenient  one.  English  translation  of  Calvin's  works  in  52  vols.  8vo. 
Edinburgh. 

*  The  editio  optima  of  Beza's  New  Testament  was  published  at  Cambridge  (1  vol. 
fol.,  1642),  and  contains  his  own  new  translation  placed  in  a  column  between  the 
Greek  te-\t  on  the  one  side  and  the  Vulgate  on  the  other.  It  is  accompanied  by  a 
copious  critical  and  exegetical  commentary  by  the  translator  himself,  and  the  com- 
mentary of  Camerarius  is  appended  to  the  end  of  the  volume. 


C78  HISTORY  OF 

learning  and  constant  reference  to  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  texts  are 
more  conspicuous. 

Other  distinguished  exegetical  writers  of  this  period  were  Bugen- 
hagen,  Bucor,  Osiander,  Camerarius,  Fagius,  Muscuhis, 
Aretius,  Castellio,  and  Bullinger.  John  Bugenhagen 
(called  also  Pomeranus,  from  his  native  place)  assisted  Luther  in 
translating  the  Scriptures,  and  wrote  annotations  on  several  books 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  Luther  extolled  him  as  beinor  the 
iirst  who  deserved  the  name  of  commentator  on  the  Psalms.  Martin 
Bucer  was  noted  for  his  refinement,  ingenuity,  and  conciliatory 
methods.  He  Avas  one  of  Luther's  coadjutors,  and  became  famous 
as  a  preacher  and  teacher  throughout  Germany.  In  1549  he  was 
invited  to  England  and  appointed  professor  of  theology  at  Cam- 
bridge. Ho  was  a  voluminous  author,  and,  as  a  biblical  expositor, 
jnaintained  the  grammatico-historical  sense.  Peter  Martyr  was  the 
author  of  commentaries  on  Genesis,  Judges,  Samuel,  Kings,  Lamen- 
tations, and  some  of  the  Pauline  epistles.  Andreas  Osiander  wrote 
a  Harmony  of  the  Gospels,  in  which  he  maintained  that  the  parallel 
narratives  are  not  accounts  of  the  same  events,  but  of  similar  events 
Avliich  followed  one  another  in  four  different  periods.  He  also 
published  an  emended  edition  of  the  Latin  Vulgate  with  numerous 
annotations,  and  various  polemical  treatises.  Camerarius  was  the 
author  of  a  critical  commentary  on  the  New  Testament,  which  is 
published  in  the  Cambridge  edition  of  Beza's  New  Testament. 
Fagius,  like  ]>ucer,  was  appointed  a  professor  in  Cambridge  Univer- 
sity, and,  at  the  request  of  Cranmer,  they  together  planned  a  critical 
edition  of  the  entire  Scriptures,  but  their  work  was  cut  off  by  early 
death.  Fagius  was  especially  noted  for  his  Hebrew  learning,  and 
was  the  author  of  several  works  on  the  Hebrew  lanoruasre  and  litera- 
turo.  Musculus  acquired  some  note  as  a  biblical  interpreter,  and 
Aretius  wrote  a  commentary  on  the  Pentateuch  and  the  entire  New 
Testament.  Sebastian  Castellio  (or  Castalion)  was  for  a  time  asso- 
ciated with  Calvin  at  Geneva,  but  after  a  few  years  left  that  place 
because  of  his  opposition  to  the  Calvinian  doctrine  of  predestination. 
He  wrote  several  exegetical  treatises,  and  published  complete  Latin 
and  French  versions  of  the  Bible,  Avhich  were  made  the  subject  of 
niuc'h  eoiiriictiiig  criticism.  He  was  more  of  a  critic  and  philologist 
than  ail  expositor.'  Ileinrich  Bullinger,  the  friend  and  ally  of 
Zwingle,  and  his  successor  at  Zurich,  was  the  author  of  many  ex- 
pository discourses,  which  were  so  highly  esteemed  in  England 
that  Aichbishop  Whitgift  gave  order  that  every  clergyman  should 

'  Conip.   .Mover,   Geschidite  der  Schiifteiklaiuiig  seit  der  Wiederherstelluiig  der 
Wisseiisclialtcii,  vol.  ii,  pp.  290-297. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  679 

obtain  a  copy  and  read  one  of  the  sermons  every  week.  Mention 
should  also  be  made  of  Carlstadt,  Luther's  violent  and  unmanage- 
able fellow  reformer,  who  maintained  against  him  the  genuineness 
of  the  Epistle  of  James,  and  also  published  a  work  on  the  Canonical 
Scriptures,  in  Avhich  the  great  Protestant  doctrine  of  the  paramount 
authority  of  the  Bible  is  ably  set  forth.  John  Agricola,  the  anti- 
nomian,  acquired  considerable  fame  as  an  expositor,  and  published 
commentaries  on  the  Gospel  of  Luke  and  several  epistles  of  Paul, 
and  John  Brentius  published  expository  discourses  upon  all  the 
books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  Strigel,  also,  the  gifted 
pupil  of  Melanchthon,  is  noted  for  his  scholia  on  the  Old  Testament, 
and  his  Ilypomnemata  on  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament. 
Matthias  Flacius,  (often  called,  from  his  native  country,  Illyricus), 

the  proiector  of  the  Magdeburg  Centuries,  was  for  a 

Flacius. 
time  professor  of  Old  Testament  literature  at  Witten- 
berg. He  was  the  author  of  numerous  theological  treatises;  but 
especially  deserving  of  notice  is  his  Clavis  Scripturae  Sacrse,  an  im- 
portant biblical  and  hermeneutical  dictionary.  "  The  work,"  says 
Davidson,  "  is  an  extraordinary  one,  whether  we  consider  the  time 
at  which  it  appeared,  the  copiousness  of  its  materials,  the  acuteness 
of  mind  which  it  manifests,  the  learning  it  contains,  or  the  amazing 
industry  of  its  author  amid  the  violent  restlessness  of  his  turbulent 
spirit.  Succeeding  writers  have  drawn  largely  from  its  pages;  yet 
its  merits  are  such  as  to  recommend  a  thorough  perusal  even  at  the 
present  day." ' 

Johannes  Piscator  flourished  in  the  latter  part  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, and  was  distinojuished  for  his  assiduous  devotion 

Pisojitor 

to  biblical  and  theological  studies.     He  translated  the 
entire  Bible  into  German,  and  also  published  a  commentary  on  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments.     Another  eminent  biblical   scholar  of 
this  period  was  Junius,  who  was  associated  at  Heidel-  Junius  and 
berg  with  the  converted  Jew,  Immanuel  Tremellius,  in  Tremeiuus. 
pi-eparing  a  Latin  translation  of  the  Old  Testament.     This  impor- 
tant version  was  published  in  parts  (from  1575  to  1579),  and  in  the 
course  of  twenty  years  passed  through  twenty  editions.''     The  trans- 
lation follows  the  original  with  great  closeness,  and  was  for  many 
years  the  most  popular  Latin   version  in  use  among  Protestants. 
Junius  was  also  the  author  of  commentaries  on  several        ^^   ,     ^ 
books   of   the  Old  and  New  Testaments,      Augustine 
Marloratus  deserves  honourable  mention  among  the  exegetes  of  this 

'  Sacred  Hermeneutics,  p.   680.     Best  edition  of  tlie  Clavis  Scripturae  is  that  of 
Musneus,  Jena,  1674,  and  Erfurt,  1719. 

*The  best  edition  is  thought  to  be  the  seventh,  Frankfort,  1624,  fol. 


680  HISTORY    OF 

period.  He  composed  expositions  of  various  books  of  Scripture,, 
but  his  most  valual)le  work  is  his  Catholic  Exposition  of  the  New 
Testament,  which  contains  Erasmus'  Latin  version,  and  the  com- 
ments of  several  ancient  fathers,  along  with  those  of  Erasmus,  Cal- 
vin, Bucer,  Melanchthon,  Zwingle,  and  others.  The  object  of  this 
work  was  to  exhibit  the  substantial  harmony  of  the  two  Protestant 
parties  and  their  agreement  with  the  ancient  Church. 

MaldonatUS.  \    .  -yr    ^  ^  X  Ci  -IT  -^  ■        ^  -,• 

John  Jlaidonatus,  a  bpanish  Jesuit,  acqun-ed  great  dis- 
tinction at  Paris  as  an  expounder  of  the  Scriptures,  and  Romanists 
and  Protestants  attended  his  lectures.  He  was  the  author  of  com- 
mentaries on  the  principal  books  of  the  Old  Testament  and  on  the 
four  Gospels.  He  maintained  the  literal  sense  of  Scripture,  and 
also  showed  great  familiarity  with  the  writings  of  the  fathers. 

Great  attention  was  given  during  the  sixteenth  century  to  the 
Translations  of  translation  of  the  Bible  into  modern  languages.  Of 
the  Bible.  Luther's  German  version  we  have  already  spoken;  also 
of  the  work  of  Lefevre,  whose  French  version  did  much  to  advance 
the  Protestant  Reformation,  although  Lefevre  never  left  the  Ro- 
man Church  (see  above,  p.  671).  Olivetan,  a  relative  of  Calvin, 
published  in  1535  a  French  translation  of  the  whole  Bible,  which 
was  subsequently  revised  by  Calvin,  Beza,  Bertram,  and  others,  and 
appeared  in  many  successive  editions.  Li  1530  Antonio  Bruccioli 
Itublished  an  Italian  version  of  the  New  Testament,  and  in  1532  an 
Italian  version  of  the  vvh«le  Bible.  In  1562  an  Italian  version  of 
the  New  Testament,  by  Gallars  and  Beza,  was  published  at  Geneva 
along  with  a  revised  edition  of  Bruccioli's  Old  Testament.  In  1007 
the  superior  Italian  version  of  Diodati  appeared  at  Geneva.  In 
1543  the  Spanish  version  of  the  New  Testament  by  Enzinas  was 
issued  at  Antwerp.  Other  Spanish  translations  made  by  learned 
Jews  appeared  a  little  later.  A  translation  of  the  whole  Bible  into 
the  Helvetian,  or  German  Swiss  dialect,  made  chiefly  by  Leo  Juda?, 
appeared  in  parts  at  Zurich  from  1524  to  1529.  In  1526  a  Belgic 
or  Dutch  translation  of  the  Bible  was  published  by  Jacob  a  Lies- 
veldt  at  Antwerp,  and  several  editions  of  the  Bohemian  Bible  were 
printed  at  Prague  from  1549  to  1577.  The  first  edition  of  the 
Polish  Bible  was  issued  at  Cracow  in  1561.  It  was  a  Catholic  pub- 
lication, but  being  much  indebted  to  the  Protestant  Bohemian 
Bible,  it  never  received  the  sanction  of  the  pope.  Numerous  other 
Polish  versions,  however,  made  by  Protestants,  were  published  dur- 
ing the  century.  A  Danish  translation  of  the  New  Testament 
appeared  at  Leipsic  in  1524,  and  at  Wittemberg  in  1558;  and  a 
translation  of  the  whole  Bible  into  the  Pomeranian  tongue,  a  dialect 
of  Lower  Saxony,  was  printed  at  Bardi  in  1588.     During  the  latter 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  681 

half  of  this  century  translations  of  the  whole  or  parts  of  the  Bibla 
were  published  in  the  Icelandic,  Finnish,  Swedish,  and  Hungarian 
languages.  In  1525  William  Tyndale  published  his  English  version 
of  the  New  Testament  at  Worms.  He  also  translated  the  Penta- 
teuch and  the  Book  of  Jonah,  which  appeared  subsequently. 
Coverdale's  English  version  of  the  wdiole  Bible  apj^eared  in  1535, 
and  in  1537  the  so-called  "Matthew's  Bible,"  edited  by  the  mar- 
tyr Rogers,  who  used  the  unpublished  manuscrijits  of  Tyndale. 
In  1539  the  version  known  as  the  "Great  Bible"  was  published 
under  the  superintendence  of  Grafton.  In  1540  Cranmer's  Bible,  a. 
mere  revision  of  the  Great  Bible,  was  printed  in  England;  in  1560 
the  "  Geneva  Bible,"  the  work  of  English  refugees  led  by  William 
Whittingham,  was  printed  at  Geneva;  in  1568  appeared  the  "Bish- 
op's Bible,"  under  the  superintendence  of  Archbishop  Parker.  All 
these  prepared  the  way  for  the  Authorized  Version,  issued  in  1611^ 
which  has  been  the  standard  English  version  until  the  present 
time.  In  1582  the  Anglo-Rhemish  New  Testament  appeared,  and 
in  1609  and  1610  the  so-called  Douay  Bible,  made  by  English  Ro- 
manists from  the  Latin  Vulgate. 

The  interest  taken  in  biblical  studies  during  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury is   further  shown  in  the  Polyglot  Bibles,  which 

•'  J  o  ^  Polyglotsw 

were  published  at  Antwerp  (1568-73)  and  Nuremberg 
(1599-1600).  The  former  included  the  whole  of  the  Complutensian 
edition  of  Ximenes  (see  above,  p.  672),  and  other  important  texts 
and  philological  helps,  and  was  prepared  by  Arias  Montanus,  as- 
sisted by  a  number  of  eminent  scholars.  Only  five  hundred  copies 
of  this  v/ork  w^ere  printed,  and  a  part  of  these  were  lost  by  the 
wreck  of  the  vessel  which  conveyed  them  to  Sj^ain.*  The  Nurem- 
berg Polyglot  was  due  to  the  enterprise  of  Elias  Hutter,  a  learned 
German,  and  contained  the  New  Testament  in  twelve  languages. 
He  also  published  considerable  portions  of  the  Old  Testament  in  six 
different  languages. 

A  careful  study  of  the  exegetical  writings  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury reveals  two  tendencies  which  early  appeared  among  the  Prot- 
estant reformers,  and  developed  gradually  during  the  next  twa 

*  The  honor  of  projecting  this  Pol3'glot  is  said  to  belong  to  Christopher  Plantin, 
who,  finding  himself  inadequate  to  support  the  expenses  of  such  an  immense  under- 
taking, presented  a  petition  to  Pliilip  II.,  King  of  Spain,  who  promised  to  advance  the 
money  necessary  for  the  execution  of  the  work,  and  to  send  learned  men  from  Spain 
to  undertake  the  arrangement  and  direction  of  the  impression.  For  this  success  Plan- 
tin  was  considerably  indebted  to  Cardinal  Spinosa,  counsellor  of  Philip  II.,  who  ap- 
proved the  plan,  and  persuaded  the  sovereign  to  sanction  it. — Townley,  Illustrations 
of  Biblical  Literature,  vol.  ii,  p.  206.     New  York,  1842. 


«82  HISTORY    OP 

centuries,  until  in  modern  times  the  one  has  run  into  extreme  ra- 
Exegeticaiten-  tionalism,  and  the  other  into  a  narrow  and  dogmatic 
dencies  of  the  orthodoxy.  These  tendencies  early  separated  the  so- 
Reformed  par-  Called  Lutheran  and  Reformed  parties.  The  more  rigid 
^^^-  orthodox  Lutherans  exhibited  a  proclivity  to  authorita- 

tive forms,  and  assumed  a  dogmatic  tone  and  method  in  their  use 
of  the  Scripture.  The  Reformed  theologians  showed  greater  readi- 
ness to  break  away  from  churchly  customs  and  traditional  ideas, 
and  treat  the  Scriptures  with  a  respectful,  but  free,  critical  spirit. 
The  two  methods  were  made  conspicuous  in  the  dispute  between 
Luther  and  Zwingle  over  the  meaning  of  the  words,  "This  is  my 
body."  Luther  and  Melanchthon,  Zwingle  and  QEcolamj)adius,  met 
at  Marburg  to  reconcile,  if  possible,  their  differences.  "  The  theo- 
logians sat  by  a  table,"  writes  Fisher,  "  the  Saxons  on  one  side  and 
the  Swiss  opjiosite  them.  Luther  wrote  upon  the  table  with  chalk 
his  text — hoc  est  meuni  corjnis — and  refused  to  budge  an  iota  from 
the  literal  sense.  But  his  opponents  would  not  admit  the  actual 
presence  of  the  body  of  Christ  in  the  sacrament,  or  that  his  body  is 
received  by  unbelievers.  Finally,  when  it  was  evident  that  no 
common  ground  could  be  reached,  Zwingle,  with  tears  in  his  eyes, 
offered  the  right  hand  of  fraternal  fellowship  to  Luther.  But  this 
Luther  refused  to  take,  not  willing,  says  Ranke,  to  recognise  them 
as  of  the  same  communion.  But  more  was  meant  by  this  refusal: 
Luther  would  regard  the  Swiss  as  friends,  but  such  was  the  influ- 
■ence  of  his  dogmatic  system  over  his  feelings  that  he  could  not 
bring  himself  to  regard  them  as  Christian  brethren.  Luther  and 
Melanchthon  at  this  time  appeared  to  have  supposed  that  an  agree- 
ment in  every  article  of  belief  is  the  necessary  condition  of  Christ- 
ian fellowship." '  The  tone  and  attitude  of  these  men  toward  one 
another  on  that  memorable  occasion  is  a  fair  index  of  the  relations 
of  rigid  dogmatic  exposition  on  the  one  hand,  and  conscientious 
rational  inquiry  on  the  other.  In  general  exposition  no  great  differ- 
ences appeared  among  the  early  reformers.  Luther  and  Melanch- 
thon represent  the  dogmatic,  Zwingle,  Q^colampadius,  and  Beza  the 
more  grammatico-historical  method  of  scriptural  interpretation. 
Calvin  combined  some  elements  of  both,  but  belonged  essentially 
to  the  Reformed  party.  It  was  not  until  two  centuries  later  that  a 
cold,  illiberal,  and  dogmatic  orthodoxy  provoked  an  opposite  ex- 
treme of  lawless  rationalism. 

'  History  of  the  Reformation,  p.  152.     New  York,  1878. 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  G83 


CHAPTER  VII. 

EXEGESIS  OP  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

The  spirit  of  religious  inquiry,  and  the  widespread  interest  in  bib- 
lical studies,  which  were  created  by  the  Protestant  Progress  of  Wb- 
Reformation,  continued  with  unabated  vigour  in  the  Ucai  studies, 
seventeenth  century.  The  Scriptures  were  translated  into  many 
languages,  and  former  translations  were  carefully  revised,  critical 
and  philological  pursuits  engaged  the  talents  of  the  most  .distin- 
guished scholars  of  Europe,  and  almost  innumerable  exegetical 
works  made  their  appearance,  from  the  diminutive  pocket  volume 
to  the  ponderous  folio  commentaries  and  polyglots. 

Toward  the  close  of  the  sixteenth  century  the  study  of  Hebrew 
literature  was  greatly  promoted  by  John  Buxtorf,  "the         „       _^ 

1  1  •    •      1       1     1  TT  Buxtorf. 

first  notable  Protestant  rabbinical  scholar.  He  was  the 
head  of  a  family  which  for  more  than  a  century  was  distinguished 
for  attainments  in  Hebrew  learning.  The  elder  Buxtorf  published 
numerous  treatises  on  Hebrew  and  Chaldee  grammar  and  lexicog- 
raphy, and  his  Lexicon  Chaldaicum  Talmudicum  et  Rabbinicum 
(Basle,  1639)  remains  to  this  day  the  most  complete  work  of  its 
kind  extant.     Valentine  Schindler  i^repared  about  this       „  , .  ,, 

^       -^  Schindler. 

time  his  Lexicon  Pentaglotton,  m  which  the  cognate 
Hebrew,  Chaldee,  Syriac,  Talmudico-Rabbinic,  and  Arabic  words 
are  alphabetically  arranged  and  defined.  The  learned  Frenchman, 
Vatriblus,  may  also  be  mentioned  as  having  a  little  be-  yj^jj^^^i^g  ^^ 
fore  this  revived  the  study  of  Hebrew  among  his  coun-  Dieu,  and  Dru- 
trymen,  and  somewhat  later  Louis  De  Dieu  did  a  similar 
work  at  the  university  of  Leyden  in  the  Netherlands,  At  this 
university  John  Drusius  was  made  professor  of  oriental  languages 
in  1577,  and  distinguished  himself  by  several  valuable  contributions 
to  biblical  literature,  especially  by  his  Annotations  upon  the  New 
Testament.  The  learned  philologist,  Joseph  Scaliger,  was  also  one 
of  the  early  professors  at  Leyden,  The  labors  of  these  men  pre- 
pared the  way  for  a  more  thorough  grammatical  study  of  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures. 

It  was  in  the  early  part  of  this  century  (1611),  as  we  have  no- 
ticed, that  the  Authorized  English  Version  appeared,   King   james* 
under  the  direction  of  King  James,  and  the  forty-seven   version, 
learned  men  who  took  part  in  its  execution  indicate  how  many 


684  '  HISTORY   OF 

competent  scholars  in  England  were  at  that  time  giving  themselves 

to  the  critical  study  of  the  Scriptures.     About  1615  Le  Jay  pro- 

iected  his  immense  work,  the  Paris  Polysrlot.     Its  pub- 
Paris  Polyglot.   ■;.        .  ,  .         '^„  ,  i         ,   .  . 

lication  Avas  begun  in   1628  and  completed  m  1645  in 

ten  imperial  folio  volumes,  containing  the  entire  Bible  in  seven  lan- 
guages (Hebrew,  Samaritan,  Chaldee,  Greek,  Syriac,  Latin,  and 
Arabic).  It  is  inconvenient  in  not  presenting  all  these  versions  to- 
gether, but  placing  them  in  different  volumes.  Volumes  i-iv  con- 
tain the  Hebrew,  Chaldee,  Septuagint,  and  Vulgate  texts  of  the 
Old  Testament;  volumes  v  and  vi  give  the  New  Testament  in 
Greek,  Syriac,  Arabic,  and  Latin;  volume  vii  contains  the  Hebrew, 
the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  and  the  Samaritan  version,  with  a  Latin 
translation  by  iNIorinus  (J,  Morin),  and  the  Arabic  and  Syriac  Pen- 
tateuch; volumes  viii-x  contain  the  rest  of  the  Old  Testament  in 
Syriac  and  Arabic.  The  work  is  too  unwieldy  to  be  of  practical 
value,  and  its  great  cost  ruined  the  fortune  of  Le  Jay.  It  was  soon 
London  Poly-  Superseded  by  the  London  Polyglot  of  Brian  Walton, 
8'°^-  the  first  volume  of  which  was  issued  in  1654,  and  the 

sixth  and  last  in  1657.  It  presents  in  parallel  columns,  or  on  the 
same  page,  the  Pentateuch  in  eight  languages,  the  Psalms  in  seven, 
Joshua,  Judges,  Ruth,  Samuel,  Kings,  Chronicles,  and  the  four 
Gospels  in  six,  the  rest  of  the  New  Testament  and  the  Book  of 
Esther  in  five,  and  the  other  books  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the 
Apocrypha  (excepting  Judith  and  Maccabees)  in  four.  It  was  fol- 
lowed in  1669  by  the  Lexicon  Heptaglotton  of  Castell,  a  joint  lexi- 
con of  the  Hebrew,  Chaldee,  Syriac,  Samaritan,  Ethiopic,  and 
Arabic,  and  a  separate  lexicon  of  the  Persian,  with  short  grammars 
of  those  tongues  (2  vols,  folio).  The  entire  work  in  eight  uniform 
volumes  is  a  magnificent  monument  of  human  learning  and  industry. 
Soon  after  the  publication  of  the  London  Polyglot  appeared  that 
The  critici  immense  collection  of  critical  and  exegetical  writings 
sacri.  known  as  the  Critici  Sacri  (London,  1660,  9  vols,  folio). 

It  was  prepared  under  the  editorial  supervision  of  Bishop  Pearson, 
Anthony  Scattergood,  and  Francis  Gouldman,  and  printed  by  Cor- 
nelius Bee.  It  was  republished  at  Amsterdam,  with  considerable 
additions,  in  1698-1702,  in  thirteen  folio  volumes.  This  work  con- 
tains all  the  annotations  of  Grotius,  Drusius,  Mtinster,  Vatablus, 
Castalio,  Clarius,  Fagius  on  the  first  four  chapters  of  Genesis,  and 
on  the  Chaldee  paraphrase  of  the  Pentateuch,  Masius  on  Joshua, 
Codurcus  on  Job,  J.  Price  on  the  Psalms,  Bayne  on  Prtiverbs, 
Forerius  on  Isaiah,  Edward  Lively  on  Hosea,  Amos,  Obadiah,  and 
Jonah,  and  Badwell  on  the  Apocrypha.  The  New  Testament  part 
contains  a  similar  range  of  authors,  and  the  work   is  ciii-ichcd  by 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  685 

numerous  philological  dissertations  and  tracts,  such  as  Louis  Cap- 
pel  on  Jephthah's  vow,  Urstius  on  the  Construction  of  Noah's  ark, 
and  Fagius  on  the  Principal  Translations  of  the  Old  Testament. 
This  great  work,  with  its  supplements,  has  treasured  up  and  pre- 
served the  wa-itings  of  many  critics  which  would  have  otherwise 
been  quite  inaccessible. 

Poole's  Synopsis,  published  in  1669-V4,  in  five  folio  volumes,  is, 
for  substance,  an  abridgment  of  the  Critici  Sacri,  al-  Pooie's  synop- 
though  it  includes  the  comments  of  many  other  writers,  s'^- 
and  refers  to  versions  not  represented  in  the  larger  work.  The 
method  of  the  Synopsis  also  differs  from  that  of  the  Critici  Sacri 
in  consolidating  the  various  comments  on  each  verse  in  one  contin- 
uous  paragraph,  and  designating  the  several  writers  by  their  initials 
in  the  margin.  This  work  is  convenient  in  that  it  presents  in  a 
brief  space  the  views  of  many  different  expositors.  It  should  be 
remarked  that  the  London  Polyglot,  with  Castell's  Lexicon,  the 
Critici  Sacri,  and  the  Synopsis  Criticorum,  forming  in  all  twenty- 
two  large  folios,  begun  and  finished  in  the  space  of  twenty-one 
years  (1653-74)  at  the  expense  of  a  few  English  divines  and  noble- 
men, constitute  a  magnificent  exegetical  library,  and  will  long  stand 
as  a  monument  of  English  biblical  learning  and  scholarshii^  in  the 
seventeenth  century.  Matthew  Poole,  the  author  of  the  Synopsis 
Criticorum,  distinguished  himself  further  by  his  English  Annota- 
tions upon  the  whole  Bible,  a  work  which  he  left  unfinished,  and 
which  was  completed  after  his  death  by  other  hands. 

Among  the  learned  men  who  assisted  Walton,  Castell,  and  Poole 

in  the  iDreparation  of  the  works  above  named,  was  John 

T  «  .  c        1  •  •  •      TT  1  Lightfoot. 

Lightfoot,  pre-eminent  for  his  attainments  in  Hebrew 

and  rabbinical  literature.  He  was  a  member  of  the  Westminster 
Assembly,  and  opposed  with  great  courage  many  of  the  tenets 
which  the  Presbyterians  were  seeking  to  establish.  He  afterward 
occupied  several  important  positions  in  the  Church  of  England. 
His  principal  works  are  a  Chronological  Arrangement  of  the  Books 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  Gleanings  in  Exodus,  Erubhim, 
or  Miscellaneous  Tracts  on  Sundry  Biblical  Themes,  a  Harmony  of 
the  Four  Gospels,  a  Commentary  on  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles, 
Description  of  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  in  the  Time  of  our  Saviour, 
and  Horse  Hebraica?  et  Talmudicae,  on  the  Gospels,  Acts,  Romans, 
and  First  Corinthians.  In  all  his  works,  but  especially  in  the  last- 
named,  he  draws  upon  his  vast  stores  of  Hebrew  and  rabbinical 
learning  to  illustrate  the  language  of  the  Bible,  and  show  the  con- 
nexion between  the  New  Testament  and  the  Jewish  Midrashim. 
Lightfoot's  works  have  been  published  in  Latin  and  in  English,  and 


686  IIISTOUY    OF 

have  ever  commanded,  and  still  hold,  a  deservedly  high  place  in 
biblical  literature.' 

Another  important  helper  in  the  preparation  of  the  London  Poly- 
Edward  Po-  glot,  and  without  whose  aid  that  great  work  would 
cock.  have  wanted  much  of  its  perfection,  was  Edward  Po- 

cock,  probably  at  that  time  the  most  accomplished  oriental  scholar 
of  Europe.  One  of  his  earliest  labours  in  biblical  literature  was 
the  transcription,  from  a  manuscript  in  the  Bodleian  library  at  Ox- 
ford, of  a  Syriac  version  of  the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter,  the  Second 
and  Third  Epistles  of  John,  and  the  Epistle  of  Jude,  the  only  books 
at  that  time  wanting  to  complete  an  edition  of  the  S5M-iac  New 
Testament,  He  was  too  modest  to  publish  it  himself,  but  Vossius 
obtained  his  copy  and  took  it  to  Leyden,  where  it  was  printed  un- 
der the  care  of  De  Dieu.  A  residence  of  six  years  at  Aleppo,  in 
Syria,  gave  Pocock  great  advantages  in  prosecuting  oriental  studies. 
On  his  return  to  England  he  was  made  professor  of  Arabic  at  Ox- 
ford, and,  notwithstanding  various  privations,  interruptions,  and 
embarrassments,  he  continued  his  favourite  literary  pursuits  through 
a  long  lifetime,  and  left  behind  him  many  works  of  enduring  value. 
He  published  six  prefatory  discourses  of  Mairaonides'  Commentary 
on  the  Mishna,  with  a  Latin  translation  and  notes,  under  the  title 
of  Porta  Mosis.  He  was  also  the  author  of  commentaries,  some- 
what diffuse  and  abounding  with  rabbinical  learning,  on  Hosea, 
Joel,  Micah,  and  Malachi. 

Other  English  exegetes  of  note  belonging  to  this  century  were 
Other  English  Henry  Hammond,  an  Arminian  divine,  and  author  of  a 
exegetes.  valuable  Paraphrase  and  Annotations  on  the  New  Test- 

ament and  on  the  Psalms  and  Proverbs;  William  Pemble,  an  emi- 
nent Calvinistic  preacher  and  scholar,  who  wrote  expositions  of 
Ecclesiastes,  Zechariah,  and  many  obscure  passages  of  Scripture; 
Robert  Leighton,  archbishop  of  Glasgow,  whose  Practical  Com- 
mentary on  the  First  Epistle  of  Peter,  and  other  expository  writ- 
ings, are  full  of  excellent  sense;  Henry  Ainsworth,  an  early  leader 
of  the  Independents,  and  author  of  useful  annotations  on  several 
books  of  the  Bible,  containing  a  new  translation  of  the  Pentateuch, 
Psalms,  and  Canticles.  Thomas  Gatakcr  was  one  of  the  ablest 
divines  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  and  one  of  the  principal 
authors  of  the  Annotations  upon  all  the  Books  of  the  Old  :ind 
New  Testaments,  which  are  commonly  known  as  the  Westminster 
Annotations.     Gataker's  share  of  this  work  embraced  the  Greater 

'  Liglitfoot's  works  were  publislied  at  London  in  1084  in  2  vols,  folio;  at  Rotterdam, 
1686,  2  vols,  folio;  at  Utrecht,  in  1699,  3  vols,  folio;  and  at  London,  1622-25,  13 
vols.  8vo. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  68T 

Prophets.  Among  his  collaborators  were  Ley,  William  Gouge  (who 
also  wrote  a  commentary  on  Hebrews),  Meric  Casaubon,  Francis  Tay- 
lor, Edward  Reynolds,  and  John  Richardson.  William  Attersoll, 
a  nonconformist  divine,  wrote  commentaries  on  Numbers  and  the 
Epistle  to  Philemon.  Bythner,  a  native  of  Poland,  gave  instruction 
in  Hebrew  at  the  University  of  Oxford,  and  wrote  a  number  of  phil- 
ological treatises,  and  a  gi'ammatical  explanation  of  the  Psalms  en- 
titled the  Lyre  of  David,  an  excellent  and  full  Chrestomathy  of  the 
entire  Hebrew  Psalter.  Joseph  Caryl  is  known  chiefly  from  his 
immense  work  on  the  Book  of  Job  (12  vols.  4to,  and  2  vols,  folio). 
Ri(;hard  Baxter,  chiefly  distinguished  for  his  modifications  of  Cal- 
vinism, and  pre-eminent  as  theologian,  preacher,  and  jjastor,  was  au- 
thor of  a  Paraphrase  of  the  New  Testament.  Arthur  Jackson 
wrote  valuable  Annotations  on  the  Prophecy  of  Isaiah,  and  "A 
Help  for  the  Understanding  of  the  Holy  Scriptures"  (Camb.,  1643, 
3  vols.  4 to).  Thomas  Godwin  comjDosed  a  useful  treatise  on  the 
Civil  and  Ecclesiastical  Rites  of  the  Ancient  Hebrews,  and  several 
other  works  illustrative  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures.  John  Good- 
win, the  famous  English  Arminian,  wrote,  in  addition  to  his  numer- 
ous theological  treatises,  an  exposition  of  Romans  ix;  and  Thomas 
Goodwin,  a  contemporary  Calvinistic  divine,  wrote  on  Ephesians 
and  Revelation.  Davenant,  bishop  of  Salisbury,  one  of  the  English 
theologians  who  attended  the  Synod  of  Dort,  was  author  of  an 
elaborate  exposition  (in  Latin)  of  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Colossians, 
Avhich  was  afterward  translated  into  English  by  Allport.  Bishop 
Bull  wrote  an  extensive  work,  entitled  Harmonia  Apostolica,  to 
show  the  agreement  between  the  Epistles  of  James  and  Paul,  and 
to  explain  the  peculiar  doctrine  of  each  apostle.  LEere  also  we 
should  mention  the  learned  James  Usher,  a  laborious  student  and 
accomplished  biblical  scholar,  whose  Annals  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments  established  a  chronology  of  the  Bible  which  has  been 
quite  generally  adopted  until  the  present  time. 

The  encouragement  and  patronage  which  Archbishop  Laud  gave 
to  biblical  and  oriental  learning  deserves  a  passing  notice. 
Although  he  wrote  very  little  himself,  he  employed  the  ^^^^' 

most  learned  men  in  foreign  countries  to  purchase  valuable  Greek 
and  oriental  manuscripts;  he  founded  the  chair  of  Arabic  at  Ox- 
ford, which  Pocock  was  the  first  to  fill,  and  he  presented  to  the 
university,  first  and  last,  more  than  twelve  hundred  manuscripts, 
which  he  had  procured  from  various  places  and  at  vast  expense. 

Few  Englishmen  of  the  seventeenth  century  are  more 
widely  known  for  their  theological  writings  than  John      "'^"   ^^°' 
Owen,  the  acknowledged  leader  of  the  Congregationalists  during 


€88  HISTORY    OF 

the  time  of  Cromwell,  and  for  some  time  after  the  restoration 
of  Charles  II.  His  most  extensive  work  is  an  Exposition  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  which  has  been  published  in  many  separate 
editions  as  well  as  in  his  collected  works.  Joseph  Mede 
distinguished  himself  in  the  early  part  of  the  century 
by  his  various  contributions  to  biblical  literature,  especially  his 
Clavis  Apocalyptica,  and  other  writings,  both  in  Latin  and  English, 
on  the  Revelation  of  John.  Kurd  speaks  of  him  as  "a  sublime 
genius,  without  vanity,  interest,  or  spleen,  but  with  a  single  un- 
mixed love  of  truth,  dedicating  his  great  talents  to  the  study  of 
the  proi)hetic  Scriptures,  and  unfolding  the  mysterious  prophecies 
of  the  Revelation." ' 

The  famous  French  scholar,  Isaac  Casaubon,  flourished  at  the  be- 
French  exe-  ginning  of  this  century,  and  deserves  our  notice  for  his 
getes.  critical  edition  of  the  Greek  Testament,  the  notes  of 

which  were  reprinted  in  the  Critici  Sacri.  The  two  brothers 
Jacques  and  Louis  Cappel  contributed  largely  to  the  exegetical 
literature  of  this  period  by  their  various  observations,  disquisitions, 
commentaries,  and  critical  notes  on  the  Old  and  New  Testaments. 
Many  of  these  were  also  reprinted  in  the  Critici  Sacri.  Menochius, 
a  learned  Italian,  was  the  author  of  brief  but  valuable  annotations 
on  the  whole  Bible.  Antoine  Goddeau,  a  Roman  Catholic  bishop, 
distinguished  himself  by  a  French  translation  and  exposition  of  the 
New  Testament  and  the  Psalms.  Richard  Simon  acquired  a  de- 
served celebrity  by  his  Critical  History  of  the  Old  Testament,  and 
showed  a  boldness  and  independence  of  thought  remarkable  for  a 
Roman  Catholic.  He  anticipated  modern  Rationalism  in  denying 
the  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  attributing  its  com- 
position to  the  age  of  Ezra  and  the  Great  Synagogue.  The  Catholic 
theologian  Estius  also  obtained  great  repute  as  a  biblical  scholar  by 
annotations  on  the  difficult  parts  of  Scri})ture,  and  a  valuable  com- 
mentary on  the  apostolical  ejjistles.  Jacob  Tirinus,  a  Jesuit,  was 
also  distinguished  as  an  exegete,  and  his  comments,  along  with  those 
of  Gagner,  Estius,  and  Menochius,  were  published  by  De  la  Haye 
in  what  was  called  the  Biblia  Magna  (5  vols,  fol.,  1643),  a  work 
somewhat  after  the  order  of  the  Critici  Sacri.  This  work  was  af- 
terward enlarged  by  the  notes  of  Lyra  and  others,  and  issued  in 
nineteen  volumes  (Paris,  1000)  under  the  title  of  Biblia  Maxima. 
Rivet,  a  French  Protestant,  spent  his  best  years  in  Holland,  and 
wrote,  in  addition  to  many  other  works,  a  General  Introduction  to 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  commentaries  on  Exodus  and  Ilosea. 
Jacques  Gaillard  became  pastor  of  a  Walloon  church  in  Holland 
'  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Propliccics,  vol.  ii,  p.  122. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  689 

about  1662,  and  became  known  as  the  author  of  a  treatise  on  the 
genealogy  of  Jesus  as  recorded  in  Matthew  and  Luke,  and  also  on 
Melchizedek  as  a  type  of  Christ.  Samuel  Bochart,  born  at  Rouen 
in  1599,  was  a  man  of  vast  learning,  acquainted  with  Hebrew,  Syriac, 
Clialdee,  and  Arabic,  and  author  of  a  Sacred  Geography,  which 
obtained  for  hun  an  invitation  to  the  court  of  Sweden,  where  be 
was  greatly  honoured.  He  is  better  known  by  his  Hierozoicon,  or 
Natural  History  of  the  Bible. 

The  Protestant  Reformation  found  in  no  European  country  a  more 
congenial  soil  than  that  of  the  Netherlands.  The  people  Early  progress 
were  of  independent  spirit,  and  noted  for  their  love  of  ^j^/jlJ^  ui'^thl 
freedom,  industry,  and  extensive  commerce  with  foreign  Netiaeriands. 
countries.  The  University  of  Leyden,  founded  in  1575,  became  in 
the  early  part  of  the  seventeenth  century  the  most  renowned  seat  of 
learning  in  all  Europe,  numbering  at  times  nearly  tAVO  thousand  stu- 
dents. In  this  celebrated  university  James  Arminius  be- 
came professor  of  theology  in  1603.  He  had  already,  in 
his  published  lectures  on  the  ninth  chapter  of  Romans,  opposed  the 
views  of  Calvin  and  Beza  on  predestination,  and  soon  after  his  ap- 
pointment at  Leyden  he  fell  into  controversy  with  one  of  his  fellow 
professors,  Francis  Gomar,  a  strenuous  Calvinist.  This  controversy 
disturbed  for  many  years  the  peace  of  the  Reformed  Church  of  the 
Netherlands,  and  continued  with  increased  bitterness  after  the  death 
of  Arminius  (1609),  and  led  to  the  holding  of  the  Synod  of  Dort 
(1818),  at  which  (the  Calvinists  being  largely  in  the  majority)  the 
opinions  of  the  Arrainian  Remonstrants  were  condemned,  their  min- 
isters were  depos.ed,  and  many  of  them  banished  from  the  country ; 
and  all  who  embraced  Arminian  doctrines  were  excluded  from  the 
fellowship  of  the  Church,  and  their  religious  assemblies  were  sup- 
pressed by  la\v.  The  Arminian  theology  was,  however,  too  deeply 
grounded  in  a  comprehensive  and  rational  exegesis  of  the  Scriptures 
to  be  thus  put  down.  M^hen  Arminius  entered  upon  his  work  at 
Leyden,  he  openly  set  himself  against  scholastic  subtleties  and  arbi- 
trary assumptions,  and  maintained  that  the  truth  of  God  could  be 
ascertained  only  by  a  thorough  study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  He  was 
an  ade[)t  in  the  original  languages  of  the  Bible,  thoroughly  versed 
in  the  writings  of  the  ancient  fathers,  a  man  of  profound  spiritual 
insight,  and,  at  the  same  time,  most  engaging  in  his  personal  de- 
meanor. Neander  calls  him  the  "pattern  of  a  conscientious  and 
zealously  investigating  theologian,  who  endeavoured  to  guard 
himself  against  all   partiality." '       His  exegetical  and  theological 

'  History  of  Christian   Dogmas,  vol.  ii,  p.  677.     Lond.,    1858.     See  the  worlcs  of 
Arminius,  translated  into  English  by  Xicholls  and  Bagnall,  3  vols.     New  York,  1843. 
44 


690  HISTORY   OF 

writings  bear  evidence  of  his  great  learning,  clear  judgment,  and 
convincing  logic,  which  his  opponents  found  it  difficult  to  meet. 

Uytenbogaert  was  a  distinguished  leader  of  the  Arminian  Remon- 
other  Dutch  strants,  and  a  most  able  and  eloquent  preacher.  He  was 
divines.  noted  for  casting  aside  the  dry  scholastic  methods,  and 
basing  his  discourses  directly  on  the  Scriptures.  Simon  Episcopius 
was  the  chief  representative  of  the  Arminians  at  the  Synod  of  Dort, 
after  whicl>  he  was  obliged,  with  other  Remonstrants,  to  leave  Hol- 
land. During  his  absence  from  the  country  he  published  several 
learned  dissertations  in  defence  of  Arminianism,  and  amonsx  them 
an  exegctical  paraphrase  of  Rom.  viii-xi.  In  1626  he  returned  to 
his  native  land,  became  identified  with  the  Remonstrants'  college  at 
Amsterdam,  and  spent  the  rest  of  his  life  in  preaching  and  literary 
activity.  His  contemporaries,  both  friends  and  enemies,  acknowl- 
edged his  great  abilities  and  acquaintance  with  the  Scriptures. 
He  was  succeeded  at  Amsterdam  by  Curcellseus,  who  was  especially 
devoted  to  New  Testament  studies,  and  published  a  critical  edition 
of  the  Greek  Testament.  A  worthy  associate  of  these  celebrated 
divines  was  Limborch,  w^ho  edited  several  of  their  works,  and  was 
the  author  of  the  Theologia  Christiana,  an  original  and  complete 
system  of  Arminian  doctrine.  He  also  wrote  commentaries  on  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  and  the  Epistles  to  the  Romans  and  Hebrews, 
which  deserve  commendation  for  their  clear  and  simple  method  of 
interpretation. 

In  connexion  Avith  these  Dutch  divines  of  the  Arminian  school 
we  should  notice  Hugo  Grotius,  one  of  the  most  remark- 
able men  of  the  seventeenth  century,  and  eminent  alike 
in  theology,  politics,  and  general  literature.  Though  suffering  the 
confiscation  of  his  property,  imprisonment,  and  exile,  his  learning 
and  talents  commanded  for  him  the  attention  of  kings  and  princes, 
and  of  the  educated  men  of  Europe.  Besides  learned  works  in  civil 
jurisprudence,  apologetics,  and  dogmatic  theology,  he  wrote  an- 
notations on  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  and  the  A])ocrypha.  His 
exegesis  is  distinguished  for  its  philological  and  historical  charac- 
ter, and  the  uniform  good  sense  and  good  taste  dis|)layed.  He  has 
been  called  the  forerunner  of  Ernesti,  but  he  often  noticeably  fails 
to  grasp  the  plan  and  scope  of  the  sacred  writers,  and  to  trace  the 
connexion  of  thought.  He  lacked  the  px-ofound  religious  intuition  of 
Luther  and  Calvin,  and  leaned  to  a  rationalistic  treatment  of  Scrip- 
ture.'    Abraham   Calovius,  a  contemporary  Ijutheran   theologian, 

'  All  file  tlipoldiiical  works  of  Grotius  wore  publislied  in  throe  folio  volumes  at 
Ix)iulon,  ill  1(>7'.).  His  annotations,  with  a  life  of  tlie  aullior,  ate  contained  in  the  first 
two  volumes.     They  also  appear  in  the  Critici  SucrL 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  691 

published   the    Biblia   Tlhistrafa    (4  vols,   fol.,   Dresden,  1719),  in 
which  he  embodied  the  whole  of  Grotius'  annotations, 
and  accompanied  them  witli  severe  criticisms.     He  also 
violently  opposed  the  teachings  of  George  Calixtus,  whose  mild  and 
conciliatory  methods  aimed  to  settle  the  disputes  between  contend- 
ing parties  in  the  Church. 

The  names  of  Ileinsius,  Vossius,  and  Spanheim  will  ever  be  asso- 
ciated with  the  cultivation  of  biblical  and  philological   „  .    . 

^  '^  Heinsius,   V  OS- 

learning.  Heinsius  acted  as  secretary  to  the  Synod  of  sins,  sraniieim, 
Dort,  and  is  known  as  the  editor  of  many  of  the  Greek  """i°ser,  etc. 
and  Roman  classics,  and  author  of  twenty  books  of  dissertations  on 
the  New  Testament.  Gerard  Jan  Vossius  and  his  son  Isaac  were 
both  eminent  as  philologists  and  theologians,  but  not  as  great  bibli- 
cal exegetes.  The  same  may  be  said  of  Friedrich  Spanheim  and  his 
two  sons,  Ezekiel  and  Friedrich,  whose  lives  and  labours  together 
extended  over  the  entire  seventeenth  century.  The  great  Swiss 
theologian  and  scholar,  J.  H.  Hottinger,  may  be  mentioned  here  as 
contributhig  largely  to  the  progress  of  Semitic  and  other  oriental 
studies;  also  Anthony  Bynseus,  who  made  great  attainments  in 
Hebrew  and  Syriac,  and  wrote  several  exegetical  works,  and  James 
Alting,  professor  of  Hebrew  at  Groningen,  author  of  a  Syro-Chal- 
daic  grammar,  commentaries  on  most  of  the  books  of  the  Bible,  and 
various  theological  treatises. 

One  of  the  most  eminent  scholars  of  the  Dutch  Reformed  Church 
of  the  seventeenth  century  was  Voetius,  w'ho  received  his 
early  training  at  Leyden  under  Gomar,  Arminius,  and 
their  colleagues.  He  was  an  influential  member  of  the  Synod  of 
Dort,  and  a  violent  opponent  of  the  Arminians.  He  also  made  it  a 
great  work  of  his  life  to  oppose  the  Cartesian  philosophy.  But  his 
methods  of  procedure  tended  to  cultivate  a  narrow  and  dogmatic 
spirit,  and  his  exegesis,  accordingly,  aimed  rather  to  support  and 
defend  a  theological  system  than  to  ascertain  by  valid  reason  the 
exact  meaning  of  the  sacred  writers.  He  was  vehemently  polemi- 
cal, and  became  the  acknowledged  head  and  leader  of  a  school  of 
exegesis  which  assumed  to  adhere  strictly  to  the  literal  sense,  but, 
at  the  same  lime,  regarded  all  biblical  criticism  as  highly  dangerous 
to  the  orthodox  faith.  The  Voetians  would  fain  have  made  the- 
dogmas  of  the  Synod  of  Dort  the  authoritative  guide  to  the  sense 
of  Scripture,  and  were  restless  before  an  ap))eal  to  the  original 
texts  of  the  Bible  and  independent  methods  of  interpretation. 

The  jxi'eat  opponent  both  of  scholasticism  and  of  a  narrow 
dogmatical  exegesis  was  John  Cocceius,  a  man  of  broad 
and  thorough  scholarship,  an  adept   in  Greek,   Hebrew,   Chaldee, 


693  HISTORY   OF 

Arabic,  and  rabbinical  literature,  and  a  -worthy  comiieer  of  such 
scholars  as  Buxtorf,  Yossius,  and  Grotius.  He  devoted  him- 
self ebiefly  to  biblical  exposition,  publishing  commentary  after 
commentary  until  he  had  gone  through  nearly  all  the  canonical 
books.'  Although  his  labours  reA'ived  and  encouraged  allegorical 
and  mystical  methods  of  interpretation,  it  must  be  conceded  that 
he  exhibited  many  of  the  very  best  qualities  of  a  biblical  exegete, 
and  did  as  ranch  as  any  man  of  his  time  to  hold  up  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures as  the  living  fountain  of  all  revealed  theology,  and  the  only 
authoritative  rule  and  standard  of  faith.  He  insisted  that  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments  must  be  treated  as  one  organic  whole,  and 
that  each  passage  should  be  interpreted  according  to  the  meaning 
of  its  words,  the  connexion  of  thought  as  traceable  through  an  en- 
tire discourse,  book,  or  epistle,  and  the  analogy  of  faith,  or  scope 
and  plan  of  the  one  complete  revelation  of  God.  He  maintained 
that  Christ  is  the  great  subject  of  divine  revelation  in  the  Old  Test- 
ament as  well  as  in  the  New,  and  hence  arose  the  saying  that  Coc- 
ceiiis  found  Christ  everywhere  in  the  Old  Testament,  but  Grotius 
nowhere.  It  is  due,  however,  to  the  memory  of  Cocceius  to  say 
that  while  he  too  often  pressed  the  typical  import  of  Old  Testa- 
ment texts  to  an  undue  extreme,  he  acted  on  the  valid  principle 
that  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  contain  the  germs  of  the  Gospel  revela- 
tion, and  that,  according  to  the  express  teaching  of  our  Lord  (John 
v,  39;  Luke  xxiv,  27),  the  Old  Testament  contained  many  things 
concerning  himself.  The  errors  into  which  he  fell  are  less  grave 
than  those  of  not  a  few  modern  critics  who  exhibit  a  notable  one- 
sidedness  in  failing  to  see  that  the  written  revelation  of  God  is 
truly  an  organic  whole,  and  that  the  New  Testament  cannot  be 
interpreted  without  the  Old,  nor  the  Old  without  the  New.  Coc- 
ceius' method  was  not  always  safe  or  satisfactory.  "  His  federal 
theology,"  says  Immer,  "  had  an  influence  on  his  treatment  of  Scrip- 
ture in  so  far  as  not  dogma,  but  the  economy  of  salvation  was  his 
guiding  principle.  This  might  lead  to  a  natural  religio-historical, 
it  might  also  lead  to  an  artificial  typological,  treatment.  Cocceius 
was  too  much  under  the  influence  of  his  time  not  to  have  fallen 
into  the  latte".  Yet  it  was  already  a  great  gain  that  an  attempt 
was  made  to  give  to  Scripture,  and  indeed  to  the  fundamental  idea 
of  Scripture,  the  supremacy  in  theology."^ 

John  Leusden  was  professor  of  Hebrew  at  Utrecht  during  neaily 
all  the  latter  half  of  the  seventeenth  century.     His  critical  .nnd 

'The  works  of  Cocceius  were  published  at  Amsterdam,  1676-78,  in  8  vols,  folio, 
and  in  1701  in  10  vols,  folio. 

*llormeiiL'utics  of  tlie  New  Testament,  p.  45.     Andovcr,  1877. 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  693 

exegetical  works  embrace  several  editions  of  the  Hebrew  and  Greek 
Scriptures,   a  Hebrew    grammar    and    lexicon,   various    ^      ^ 

'^ .  .  °  ...  .  Leusden    and 

treatises  in  the  department  of  biblical  introduction,  and  Corueiius  a 
Latin  translations  of  David  Kimchi's  commentaries  on  ^^^  ^' 
Jonah,  Joel,  and  Obadiah.  He  also  edited  Lightfoot's  works  in 
Latin,  and  Poole's  Synopsis.  His  writings  were  not  only  charac- 
terized by  exact  and  ample  learning,  but  also  adaj)ted  to  meet 
practical  wants,  and  are  of  solid  value  even  at  this  day.  Corne- 
lius a  Lapide,  the  learned  Roman  Catholic  commentator,  and  pro- 
fessor of  Hebrew  at  Louvain.  and  afterward  at  Rome,  compiled 
from  the  fathers  an  elaborate  exposition  of  all  the  books  of  the 
Bible  except  Job  and  the  Psalms.  It  was  published  at  Antwerp 
(1681,  10  vols  foL),  Venice  (1730,  11  vols,  fol.),  and  Lyons  (1838, 
11  vols.  4to). 

Biblical  scholai'ship  in  Germany  during  the  seventeenth  century 

furnished  fewer  names  and  works  of  crreat  celebrity 

Olearius 
than  either  Holland  or  England.     Nevertheless,  many 

German  exegetes  of  great  merit  apjieared,  some  of  whom  have  al- 
ready been  incidentally  noticed.  The  name  of  Olearius  was  made 
famous  by  eight  different  persons,  members  of  one  family,  who  con- 
tributed in  various  ways  to  the  advancement  of  exegetical  and  the- 
ological learning.  The  most  distinguished  of  these  for  biblical 
scholarship  was  John  Olearius,  professor  of  Greek  and  of  theology 
at  the  University  of  Leipsic.  He  wrote  a  work  on  the  Elements 
of  Sacred  Hermeneutics,  another  on  the  style  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  also  several  philological  and  theological  treatises.  His 
son  Gottfried  wrote  a  learned  analysis  of  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews, and  Observations  on  the  Gospel  of  Matthew. 

Other   distinguished   German   scholars,   who  contributed   to  the 

progress    of   biblical  learning,  were   Solomon   Glassius   ^,^ 

^      "  o  •  r  other  German 

and  Erasmus  Schmidt.     The   former  was  educated  at  bibikai  schoi- 

Wittenberg  and  Jena,  and  became  noted  for  his  knowl-  ^^' 
edge  of  Hebrew  and  cognate  languages.  He  wrote  several  useful 
works,  among  which  were  an  Exposition  of  the  Gospels  and  Epis- 
tles, and  his  celebrated  Philologia  Sacra,  a  kind  of  philologico-bib- 
lical  lexicon  of  scriptural  words  and  tropes.'  Schmidt  was  the 
author  of  a  very  convenient  concordance  of  the  Greek  Testament, 
which  is  still  in  use,  but  which  has  recently  been  greatly  enlarged 
and  improved  by  Bruder.  George  Pasor  was  author  of  a  lexicon 
and  grammar  of  the  New   Testament,  and   Dietrich,  a  Lutheran 

'  The  best  edition  of  the  Philologia  Sacra  is  that  of  Leipsic,  1725,  4to.  The  edi- 
tion  of  Dathe  and  Bauer  (Lps.,  1776-97,  3  vols.  Svo)  is  interpolated  with  rationalistic 
notions. 


G94  HISTORY    OF 

theologian,  distinguished  himself  iu  the  same  department  by  his 
Pliilologico-Theological  Lexicon  of  the  New  Testament.  (Frankf., 
1680).  Augustus  Pfeiffer  became  noted  toward  the  close  of  this 
century  for  his  rare  attainments  in  philology  and  contributions 
to  biblical  literature.  His  Dubia  Vexata  is  a  convenient  and  use- 
ful series  of  dissertations  on  the  more  difficult  passages  of  the  Old 
Testament.'  Martin  Geier  wrote  a  commentary  on  the  Psalms, 
Proverbs,  and  Ecclesiastes.  Sebastian  Schmid  was  the  author  of 
a  Latin  translation  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  and  learned 
commentaries  on  Genesis,  Judges,  Ruth,  Kings,  Job,  Ecclesiastes, 
Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  the  Minor  Proi)hets;  also  on  Romans,  Gala- 
tians,  Ephesians,  Colossians,  and  Hebrews. 

In  the  latter  part  of  the  seventeenth  century  there  appeared  many 
Progress  of  notable  indications  of  a  widespread  yearning  for  liberty 
free  thought.  Qf  thought  and  of  speech.  The  Baconian  and  Carte- 
sian systems  of  philosophy  did  not  a  little  in  preparing  the  way. 
The  speculations  of  the  celebrated  Spinoza  gave  a  mighty  impulse 
to  the  movement.  His  famous  Tractatus  Theologico-Politicus  was 
to  the  seventeenth  century  what  Strauss'  Life  of  Jesus  has  been  to 
the  nineteenth.     "  The  book  marks  an  epoch,"  says  Farrar,  "  a  new 

era  in  the  critical  and  philosophical  investigation  of 
Spinoza.  ...  ^    .  ,.1  .  iiT 

religion.  Spinoza  s  ideas  are,  as  it  were,  the  head  wa- 
ters from  which  flows  the  current  which  is  afterward  parted  into 
separate  streams."  *  His  speculations  anticipated  many  of  the  later 
teachings  of  rationalism.  His  philosophy  necessarily  excluded  the 
reality  of  any  miraculous  interference  of  Deity  in  the  aifairs  of  the 
world,  and  he  explained  j^rophecy  as  the  combined  product  of  vivid 
imagination  and  ardent  desire.  The  writings  of  Lord  Herbert  and 
Hobbes  contributed  also  to  the  politico-religious  theorizing  of  that 
age.  As  early  as  1644  Milton  published  his  Areopagitica,  or  plea 
for  the  liberty  of  unlicensed  printing,  and  a  little  later  Jeremy 
Taylor  produced  his  work,  entitled  Liberty  of  Prophesying,  in 
Avhich  he  warmly  pleaded  for  freedom  of  public  worship  and  relig- 
ious ministrations.  Locke's  Letters  on  Toleration  advocated  en- 
tire religious  freedom.  The  irrepressible  tendencies  to  freedom  of 
thought  and  speech,  indicated  by  such  publications,  led  to  virulent 
controversy  and  political  revolution,  but  were  the  means  of  devel- 
oping a  more  thorough  investigation  of  the  historical  beginnings  of 
(Christianity,  and  a  more  exact  and  scientific  interpretaiion  of  its 
sacred  books. 

'  Tliird  edition  with  valuable  additions,  Lcipsic,  1692,  4to. 
-Critical  History  of  Free  Thouglit,  p.  112.     Now  York,  1866. 


BIBLICAL  INTERPIIETATION.  695 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

EXEGESIS    OP    THE    EIGHTEENTH    CENTURY. 

The  eighteenth  century  was  notably  a  period  of  enlightenment. 
Biblical  criticism  and  interjH-etation  assumed  a  more  sci-  ^  period  of  en- 
entific  character,  penetrating  to  the  historical  founda-  Hgtitenment. 
tions  of  the  books  of  Scripture.  It  was  an  age  of  research,  of  philo- 
sophical investigation,  of  sceptical  and  rationalistic  assaults  upon 
Christianity,  of  extensive  religious  revival,  and  of  political  revolu- 
tion. These  exciting  and  often  conflicting  movements  gave  a  new 
and  marked  impulse  to  biblical  studies.  The  great  exegetical 
scholars  of  this  period,  too  numerous  to  be  fully  described  in  these 
pages,  laid  the  foundations  of  that  exact  grammatico-historical  in- 
terpretation which  is  yielding  its  rich  and  varied  products  in  our 
own  day. 

The  Cocceian  school  of  exegesis,  already  described  (pp.  691,  692), 
was  ably  represented  at  the  beginning  of  this  century  by 
Campegius  Vitringa,  whose  elaborate  commentary  on 
Isaiah  is  one  of  the  most  comprehensive,  carefully  arranged,  and 
exhaustive  specimens  of  biblical  exposition  which  has  ever  appeared 
in  any  age.  It  has  the  faults  of  the  Cocceian  method,  and  occasion- 
ally runs  into  mystical  and  allegorical  interpretations.  It  assumes 
such  a  fulness  of  meaning  in  the  words  of  prophecy  that  effort  is 
constantly  made  to  show  how  much  the  language  of  Isaiah  may 
signify.  Nevertheless,  it  exhibits  great  exegetical  ability;  it  is  a 
storehouse  of  useful  exposition,  and  has  been  acknowledged  by  all 
siicceeding  writers  as  a  work  of  solid  and  permanent  value.  Vi- 
tringa was  also  the  author  of  an  important  work  on  the  Ancient 
Synagogue,  and  numerous  other  treatises  on  various  topics  of  sacred 
literature.  His  son  Campegius,  known  as  "  the  5'ounger,"  acquired 
some  distinction  by  a  work  on  Natural  Theology  and  a  volume  of 
Sacred  Dissertations. 

Another  distinguished  writer  of  this  school  was  Herman  Witsius, 
who  maintained  with  great  learning,  and  on  a  scriptural 
basis,  the  Federal  theology.     He  was  surpassed,  how"-  "^'  ^™^  * 

ever,  as  an  exegete,  by  F.  A.  Lampe,  professor  of  theology  at 
Utrecht  and  later  at  Bremen,  whose  very  full  commentary  on  the 
Gospel  of  John  holds  even  to  this  day  a  high  rank  among  the 


696  HISTORY  OP 

learned  expositions  of  that  important  book.  A  more  voluminous 
commentator  was  the  learned  Dutch  divine,  Herman 
Yenema,  professor  of  theology  at  Frankener.     His  life 

extended  over  the  greater  part  of  the  eighteenth  century,  and  he 

wrote  extensively  upon  Genesis,  the  Psalms  (6  vols.  4to),  and  many 

of  the  prophetical  books. 

John  Le  Clerc,  often  called  Clericus,  was  one  of  the  most  prolific 

excGretical  M'riters   of   the   Netherlands.     T]iouo;h   born 
Le  Clerc  •  • 

and  educated  at  Geneva  he  became  identified  with  the 

Remonstrants,  and  spent  most  of  his  life  as  professor  at  the  Armin- 
ian  college  of  Amsterdam.      Besides  editing  many  of  the  Greek 
and  Latin  classics,  a  new  issue  of  Cotelerius'  Patres  Apostolici,  the 
complete  works  of  Erasmus,  and  some  theological  treatises  of  Peta- 
vius  and  Grotius,  he  published  a  French  translation  of  the  New 
Testament,  and  a  Latin  translation  of  Hammond's  Annotations  on 
the  New  Testament,  with  valuable  additions  of  his  own.     But  his 
greatest  exegetical  work  was  a  Latin  translation  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  commentary  on  the  same  (4  vols.  foL,  Amsterd.,  1693- 
1 731).    The  translation  is  faithful,  though  not  as  close  to  tlie  original 
Hebrew  as  others  that  have  been  made,  and  the  notes  are  critical, 
abounding  in  happy  and  pertinent  suggestions,  usually  clear  and  dis- 
criminating, but  at  times  evincing  a  notable  rationajistic  tendency.' 
Albert  Schultens,  jDrofessor  of  Arabic  and  Hebrew  at  Leyden, 
was  among  the  first  to  oppose  the  notion  then  prevalent 
that  Hebrew  was  tlie  original  language  of  mankind.     He 
has  been  called  the  father  of  modern   Hebrew  grammar,  and  his 
labours  not  only  contributed  greatly  to  the  advancement  of  oriental 
learning,  but  also  gave  a  decided  impulse  to  Old  Testament  philol- 
ogy and  exegesis.     Besides  his  various  works  on  Hebrew,  Chaldee, 
and  Syriac  grammar,  and  numerous  philological  dissertations,  he 
wrote  commentaries  on  several  books  of  the  New  Testament,  some 
of  which  yet  remain  in  manuscript.     His  son  John  Jacob,  and  his 
grandson  Heinrich,  were  also  distinguished  as  oriental  scholars. 
Unsurpassed  by  any  of  these  as  an  orientalist  was  Reland,  pro- 
fessor at  LTtrecht.     He  was  pre-eminent  for  his  ample 
Reland.         ,  .  ...  ,  n     .     i 

learning,    painstaking   accuracy,   and    sound    judgment. 

His  published  works  are  mainly  in  the  field  of  biblical  antiquities, 
and  among  them  the  most  important  is  his  Palestine  Illustrated 
from  Ancient  Monuments,  which  yet  remains  the  standard  work  on 
Palestine  before  the  time  of  the  Crusades,  and,  so  far  as  it  goes, 
cannot  well  be  superseded. 

'  Rpe  Jlcver,  Goseliichte  der  Schiifterkliirung  seit  dcr  WieJeiherstellung  dcr  VVi* 
seuschailcn,  vol.  iv,  pp.  441-446. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  697 

Christian  Sclioettgen  is  especially  known  by  his  Ilorae  Hebi'aicae 
et  Talmudicae  on  the  New  Testament  (2  vols.  4to,  Dres-  schoettgen, 
den,  1 '783-42).  This  valuable  work  follows  the  plan  of  Meuscuen. 
Lightfoot's  lioi'ae  Ilebraicae  (see  above,  p.  685),  and  aims  to  sup- 
plement or  complete  it  by  a  similar  treatment  of  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament  not  covered  by  the  work  of  Lightfoot.  Schoettgen 
was  also  the  author  of  a  volume  on  the  true  Messiah,  and  a  Lexicon 
of  the  New  Testament.  J.  G.  Meuschen  deserves  honourable  notice 
for  his  work  on  the  New  Testament  as  illustrated  from  the  Talmud 
(Coburg,  1724,  4to),  and  for  other  miscellaneous  contributions  to 
biblical  literature.  Surenhusius  was  also  distinguished 
for  his  attainments  in  Hebrew  and  rabbinical  learning. 
His  edition  of  the  Mishna,  with  a  Latin  translation  and  notes,  has 
not  been  superseded,  and  his  work  on  the  Old  Testament  citations 
in  the  New  Testament,  illustrated  by  the  rabbinical  writings,  re- 
mains without  a  rival  to  this  day.     Ley  decker,  a  theo- 

LiBvdGckGr. 

logical  professor  at  L^trecht,  was  famous  both  for  his 
proficiency  in  biblical  and  rabbinical  studies  and  his  opposition  to 
the  systems  of  Cocceius  and  Descartes.  His  most  useful  contribu- 
tion to  biblical  literature  was  a  treatise  on  the  Republic  of  the 
Hebrews,  a  large  folio  volume  (Amst.,  1704),  in  which  the  antiqui- 
ties of  the  Hebrew  people  are  set  forth  in  connexion  with  a  histor- 
ical narrative,  arranged  by  epochs,  and  abounding  with  evidences 
of  extensive  research  in  Jewish  history  and  literature.  Peter  Wes- 
seling,  another  professor  at  Utrecht,  published  several  works  on 
Jewish  antiquities,  and  dissertations  on  various  books  of  Scripture. 
J.  C.  Wolf  distinguished  himself  in  the  field  of  Jewish  literature 
by  his  celebrated  Bibliotheca  Hebraea,  a  storehouse  of  information 
on  matters  of  Jewish  antiquity.  His  Curae  Philologicae  on  the 
New  Testament  also  contains  a  vast  mass  of  sound  and  useful  anno- 
tations. Alberti,  a  Dutch  theologian,  and  Kypke,  a  German  orient- 
alist, wrote  valuable  works  designed  to  illustrate  the  language  of 
the  Nevv^  Testament  by  means  of  parallel  passages  from  Greek  classic 
authors.  Augustine  Calmet,  a  learned  Benedictine,  is  known  in 
all  Christendom  by  his  voluminous  commentaries  on  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments  and  his  Dictionary  of  the  Bible ;  and  the  French 
Protestant  scholar,  Beausobre,  acquired  great  distinction  by  his 
various  contributions  to  dogmatic  and  biblical  theology.  Pasquier 
Quesnel,  the  devout  French  Catholic,  is  also  widely  known  by  his 
Moral  Reflections  on  the  New  Testament. 

Noteworthy  progress  was  made  during  this  century  in  the  science 
of  Textual  Criticism.  Critical  editions  of  the  Hebrew  text  of  the 
Old  Testament  had   been  published  by  Minister  (1536),  Buxtorf 


698  HISTORY   OF 

(1G19),  and  Jablonski  (1699).     In  1705  appeared  the  excellent  edi- 
r  ss   n   ^'^"  ^^  ^^^^^  ^^^  Hooght,  giving  the  ]\Iasoretic  readings 
Textual  criti-  in  the  margin,  and  at  the  end  an  additional  collection 
of   various    readings.      J.   H.   Michaelis   published    his 
edition  in   1720.     He  collated,  somewhat  inaccurately,  twenty-four 
printed  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  and  five  manuscripts  in  the 
library  of  Erfurt.     Christian  Reineccius,  a  Lutheran  divine,  pub- 
lished a  Hebrew  Bible  in  which  he  professed  to  incorporate  the 
results  of  a  faithful  collation  of  the  best  codices  and  editions;  but 
his  work  is  without  critical  apparatus  or  notation.     Iloubigant,  a 
French  priest,  published  in  four  folio  volumes   (Paris, 
1753,  1754)  a  new  edition,  using  the  text  of  Van  der 
Hooght,  and  proposing  in  the  margin  and  at  the  end  of  each  vol- 
ume numerous  corrections.     He  made  use  of  the  Samaritan  Penta- 
teuch and  various  manuscripts  accessible  in  the  libraries  of  Paris. 
Although  the  work  was  executed  with  great  care,  its  numerous 
V  onjectural  emendations  have  exposed  it  to  adverse  criticism.    Ben- 

iamin  Kennicott,  a  learned  Englishman,  after  havino-  pub- 

Kennicott.        ,.  ,      ,  .  ,.  .  ^     ,  '  /.,.-, 

lished  various  dissertations  on  the  state  oi  the  printed 

Hebrew  text  of  the  Old  Testament,  entered  upon  the  preparation 
of  a  critical  edition  of  it,  and  secured  the  co-operation  of  several 
foreign  scholars.  Six  hundred  and  ninety-four  manuscripts  Avere 
collated,  sixteen  manuscripts  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  and  all 
the  most  noted  printed  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible.  Twenty 
years  of  assiduous  labour  were  given  to  this  enterprise,  and  the 
result  was  ])ublished  at  Oxford  in  two  folio  volumes,  the  first  in 
1776,  the  second  in  1780.  Although  it  was  a  work  of  herculean 
labour  and  praiseworthy  industry,  the  great  number  of  various 
readings  furnished  are  comparatively  unimportant,  and  serve  to 
show  that  no  great  help  to  the  emendation  of  the  Hebrew  text  can 
be  expected  from  a  collation  of  existing  manuscripts.  An  impor- 
tant  supplement   to   Kennicott's   work   was   published   at   Parma 

^  ^  ,  (4  vols.  4to,  1784-88)  by  the  Italian  orientalist,  De  Rossi, 
De  Rossi.  1  11         T 

who  collated  anew  many  of  the  manuscripts  used  by 

Kennicott,  and  nearly  six  hundred  others,  besides  printed  editions, 
Samaritan  manuscripts,  and  ancient  versions.  An  edition  of  the 
Hebrew  Bible,  based  upon  that  of  l^eineccius,  and  containing  the 
most  important  of  Kennicott's  and  De  Rossi's  various  readings,  was 
published  at  Leipsic,  1793,  by  Doderlein  and  Meisner,  and  a  much 
more  correct  and  elegant  edition,  embodying  the  best  results  of 
previous  collations,  w.is  ])ub]islied  a  little  later  by  Jahn  (\'ienna, 
1806,  4  vols.  8vo). 
New  Testament  textual  criticism  was  greatly  promoted  during 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  699 

this  period  by  the  labours  of  Mill  and  Bentley  in  England,  and 
Benajel   and   Wetstein   in    Germany.      John  Mill   spent 

.  ,  J   Mill 

thirty  years  in  preparing  his  edition  of  the  Greek  Testa- 
ment, which  was  published  at  Oxford  in  1707,  only  fourteen  days 
before  its  author's  death.  Its  various  readings  amount  to  about 
thirty  thousand,  and  its  prolegomena  are  of  permanent  value.  In 
1720  Richard  Bentley,  then  regius  professor  of  divinity 
at  Cambridge,  published  his  proposals  for  a  new  edition 
of  the  Greek  and  Latin  Testament,  Avhich  should  abandon  the 
Textus  Receptus,  and,  making  use  of  no  authority  under  nine  hun- 
dred years  old,  would  "  take  two  thousand  errors  out  of  the  Pope's 
Vulgate,  and  as  many  out  of  the  Protestant  Pope  Stephen's."  He 
gave  the  last  chapter  of  the  Apocalypse  in  Greek  and  Latin  as  a 
specimen.'  His  plan  was  essentially  that  which  was  carried  out  a 
century  later  by  Lachmann,  and  his  rare  attainments  in  classical 
scholarship  and  extensive  j^reparations  for  his  task  would  doubtless 
have  produced  a  most  important  contribution  to  biblical  literature. 
But  unfortunate  controversies  into  which  he  became  involved  frus- 
trated this  worthy  enterprise,  and  no  other  important  effort  in  that 
line  was  made  again  in  England  until  the  following  century. 

John  Albert  Bengel  published  in  1734  a  critical  edition  of  the 
Greek  Testament  together  with  a  critical  commentary,  in 
which  he  enunciated  his  principles,  and  set  the  example 
of  giving  the  testimonies  both  for  and  against  the  received  text. 
Bengel  is  better  known  by  his  Gnomon  of  the  New  Testament,  a 
condensed  but  remarkably  rich  and  suggestive  commentary,  which 
aims,  according  to  the  titlepage,  to  "  point  out  from  the  natural 
force  of  the  Avords  the  simplicity,  depth,  harmony,  and  saving 
power  of  the  divine  thoughts."  His  principles  of  interpretation 
are  in  the  main  essentially  sound,  and  his  methods  of  exposition 
have  not  been  greatly  improved  upon  by  any  later  writers.^  In  his 
attempt  to  expound  prophecy,  however,  especially  the  book  of 
Revelation,  he  showed  defective  judgment,  and  indulged  in  vain 
speculatiims. 

In  1751-2  John  J.  Wetstein  published  his  exceedingly  valuable 

edition  of  the  Greek  Testament  (Amst.,  2  vols.  fol.).    His 

Wetstein. 
judgment  as  a  critic  Avas  not  of  the  highest  order,  but 

his  Avork  is  of  enduring  value  for  its  \'ast  research  and  collation  of 

'  Proposals  for  Printing  a  New  Edition  of  the  Greek  Testament  and  St.  Ilierom's 
Latin  version,  with  a  full  Answer  to  all  the  Remarks  of  a  late  Pamphleteer.  Lond., 
1721.    4to. 

^  An  English  translation  of  the  Gnomon  was  published  at  Edinburgh,  5  vols.,  1857, 
1858,  and  another,  much  improved  by  Lewis  and  Vincent,  at  Philadelphia,  18G(),  1861. 


700  HISTORY  OF 

authorities,  its  abundant  citation  of  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Latin 
writers,  and  its  learned  prolegomena,  so  indispensable  to  every 
thorough  critic.  With  him  originated  the  custom,  now  universally 
cuiTent,  of  designating  the  uncial  manuscripts  by  the  letters  of  the 
alphabet,  and  the  cursive  by  numerals.  Other  scholars  of  note 
who  contributed  to  the  advancement  of  textual  criticism  were  C.  F. 
]Matthaii,  a  professor  at  Moscow,  Alter,  a  German  Jesuit  and  pro- 
fessor of  Greek  at  Vienna,  who  published  a  critical  edition  of  the 
Greek  Testament  (1786,  1787),  Adler,  Birch,  Moldenhauer,  and 
Woide,  who  collated  manuscripts  and  prepared  valuable  materials 
for  the  use  of  later  critics.  Matthjei  published  a  valuable  edition 
of  the  New  Testament,  Greek  and  Latin  (12  vols,,  Riga,  1782-88), 
which  was  injured  by  its  unfair  attacks  on  Griesbach,  but  is  con- 
ceded by  later  scholars  to  possess  much  merit. 

John  J.  Griesbach  improved  upon  all  his  predecessors  in  New 

Testament    criticism  by   arranG;ino:   his    authorities   and 
Griesbach.  ,        .„    .  ,  •',.  ,     .  i       , 

classiiying    them  according  to  then-   age   and  place  of 

origin.  He  made  much  of  the  families  or  "recensions"  of  manu- 
scripts, a  principle  already  recognised  by  Bengel  and  Semler,  and 
distributed  the  families  into  Alexandrian,  Western,  and  Byzantine. 
His  Greek  Testament  appeared  in  parts  at  Halle  and  London  in 
1774-77,  and  again  in  1796-1800  (2  vols.  8vo).  It  was  also  printed 
in  other  forms.  Griesbach  was  unquestionably  a  consummate  critic, 
and  liis  work  marks  an  epoch  in  textual  criticism.  He  was  also  the 
author  of  a  critical  commentary  on  the  New  Testament  text,  and  a 
work  on  New  Testament  hermeneutics. 

The  labours  of  these  eminent  critics  met  with  much  opposition, 
and  were  naturally  looked  upon  by  many  with  grave  suspicion. 
The  tendency  of  such  researches  seemed  to  unsettle  the  foundations 
of  the  faith,  and  i)olemie  divines  of  the  Voetian  school  could  not  be 
expected  to  favour  or  encourage  them. 

Among  the  English  divines  of  this  century  who  distinguished 
themselves  by  contributions  to  exegetical  literature  we  should 
give  a  prominent  place  to  Symon  Patrick,  bishop  of  Ely. 
The  greater  part  of  his  life  belongs  to  the  seventeenth 
century.  His  principal  literary  Avork  was  a  paraphrase  and  com- 
mentary on  the  historical  and  poetical  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
a  learned,  but  eminently  practical  and  useful,  exposition,  in  which 
the  meaning  of  the  sacred  writers  is  set  forth  in  clear  and  simj)le 
style,  adapted  to  meet  the  wants  of  ordinary  readers,  and  at  the 
same  time  evincing  wide  and  thorough  acquaintance  witli  ancient 
and  modern  writers.  l*atrick's  commentary  was  continued  after 
his  death  by  William  Lowth,  whose  exposition  of  the  prophetical 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  701 

books,  first  publislied  in  separate  portions,  was  afterward  joined 
with  Whitby's  Paraphrase  and  Commentary  on  the  New  Testament, 
Lowman's  Apocalypse,  and  Arnald's  Apocrypha,  the  whole  form- 
ing a  complete  commentary  on  the  Bible,  including  the  Old  Testa- 
ment apocryphal  books.  William  Lowth  was  a  judicious 
exegete,  and  his  work  on  the  Prophets  is  one  of  the  best  '  °^  ' 
commentaries  of  its  kind.  It  is  not  strictly  a  critical  work,  but,  like 
the  notes  of  Patrick,  exhibits  thorough  scholarship,  and  furnishes  a 
clear  and  useful  exposition.  Whitby's  Commentary  on  the  New 
Testament  first  appeared  in  1703,  and  has  ever  since 
maintained  a  high  place  in  exegetical  literature.    Whitby  "'  ^" 

is  noted  for  his  opposition  to  Mill's  useful  labours  in  textual  criti- 
cism, and  he  ventured  to  defend  the  Textus  Receptus  as  if  it  were 
infallible.  This  eiFort,  like  that  of  Owen  against  Brian  Walton  in 
the  previous  century,  displayed  much  more  zeal  than  good  sense  or 
judgment. 

Robert  Lowth,  son  of  William,  and  bishop  of  London,  won  a 
deserved  celebrity  by  the  publication  (in  1753)  of  his 
Sacred  Poetry  of  the  Hebrews,  which  has  been  trans- 
lated into  English  and  issued  in  many  editions.  Although  the 
spirit  and  characteristics  of  Hebrew  poetry  had  been  pointed  out 
by  previous  wa'iters,  Lowth  was  the  first  to  set  them  forth  in  clear 
and  convincing  form,  and  this  work  marks  a  new  epoch  in  the 
treatment  of  that  subject,  and  has  a  permanent  value.  A  later  and 
more  widely  read  and  useful  work  of  this  distinguished  prelate  was 
his  new  translation  of  Isaiah,  with  a  preliminary  dissertation  and 
notes.  The  design  of  this  work,  the  author  states,  "  is  not  only  to 
give  an  exact  and  faithful  representation  of  the  words  and  of  the 
sense  of  the  prophet,  by  adhering  closely  to  the  letter  of  the  text, 
and  treading  as  nearly  as  may  be  in  his  footsteps ;  but,  moreover, 
to  imitate  the  air  and  manner  of  the  author,  to  express  the  form 
and  fashion  of  the  composition,  and  to  give  the  English  reader 
some  notion  of  the  peculiar  turn  and  cast  of  the  original."  This 
design  Avas  very  worthily  executed,  and  the  work  soon  obtained  a 
Euroi)ean  fame.  It  was  reprinted  in  many  editions,  and  translated 
by  Koppe  into  the  German  language. 

Probably  no  English  commentary  has  had  a  wider  circulation  or 
is  better  known  than  that  of  Matthew  Henry,  It  is  made 
up  of  the  substance  of  expository  lectures  which  were 
delivered  by  him  through  a  period  of  many  years,  prepared  by  his 
own  hand  as  far  as  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  completed  from 
his  manuscripts  by  a  number  of  ministers.  It  is  not  a  critical  work, 
and  not  strictly  uxegetical ;  but  it  is  full  of  practical  good  sense, 


702  HISTORY    OP 

and  pithy  remarks  which  often  breathe  the  very  spirit  of  the  sacred 
writers,  and   always  tend  to  edification.     Of  a  similar  spirit  and 
style,   hut   less    elaborate,    is   the    Family  Expositor  of 
Philip  Doddridge.     Ilis  notes  and  observations  display 
an  ardent  piety,  a  love  for  the  truth,  and  a  desire  to  profit  others, 
but  are  wanting  in  philological  merit  and  discriminating  judgment. 
Greater  ability  and  exegetical  skill  are  manifested  in  the  commen- 
tary of  William  Dodd,  who  made  large  use  of  previous 
writings,  both  li,ngli8h  and  toreign.     As  an  exposition  of 
the  true  sense  of  the  Scriptures  its  decided  merits  have  always  been 
acknowledged.     Adam  Clarke  pronounced  it  the  best  English  com- 
mentary in  existence.     Coke's  commentary  on  the  Bible  is  substan- 
tially a  reprint  of  the  work  of  Dodd,  and  published  Avithout  proper 
acknowledgment.     The  well-known  and  widely  circulated  commen- 
tary of  Thomas  Scott  belongs  to  this  same  class  of  prac- 

Scott.  . 

tical  notes  and  observations  upon  the  English  Bible.  It 
has  little  or  no  value  in  criticism  and  exegesis,  but,  like  the  work 
of  Henry,  abounds  with  pious  reflections  of  a  homiletical  character. 
The  same  may  be  said  of  Burkitt's  Expository  Notes  on  the  New 
Testament,  which  has  passed  through  many  editions,  and  is  still 
widely  read. 

John  Gill,  an  eminent  English  Baptist,  was  especially  distin- 
Giii,  Chandler,  guislied  for  his  rabbinical  learning.  His  exposition  of 
Pearce.  ^j^g  Qjj  ^nd  New  Testaments,  in  nine  large  octavo  vol- 

umes, is  a  monument  of  industry  and  research,  but  is  too  diffuse  to 
be  of  practical  value,  and  sometimes  runs  into  spiritualizing  proc- 
esses. Samuel  Chandler,  a  dissenting  minister,  published  a  critical 
history  of  David,  a  vindication  of  Daniel's  prophecies,  a  paraphrase 
and  commentary  on  Joel,  and  also  on  the  Ei)istles  to  the  Galatians 
and  Ephesians.  Zachary  Pearce  wrote  a  valuable  commentary  on 
the  Gospels  and  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  a  reply  to  Woolston's 

Discourses  on  Miracles.  James  Macknight,  a  Scotch 
Macknight.        ,.    .  t  ^-      ^-  w        i    "i  •     tt 

divine,  won  distinction  as  an  expositor  by  his  Harmony 

of  the  Gospels,  and   his  new  translation,  paraphrase,  and  notes  on 

the  Epistles.     This  latter  work,  though  not  of  the  first  rank,  was 

the  result  of  thirty  years  of  labour,  and  is  still  worthy  of  attention 

and  study.  George  Campbell  is  also  Avidely  know^n  by 
Campbull.         ,  .  ,      ";  ,  ,      .  '       ,       -^  ^  /        .  i 

his  valuable  translation  ot  the  rour  Gospels,  with  ])re- 

liininary   dissertations    and    critical   and  explanatory   notes.      His 

Dissertation  on  the  Miracles,  in  reply  to  Hume,  had  an  extensive 

circulation,  and  was  translated  into  several  of  the   Ian- 

N6WC0ITIG. 

guages  of  Europe.  William  Newcome  is  known  chiefly 
by  his  Plarmony  of  the  Gospels.     He  also  prepared  a  new  version 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION".  703 

of  Ezekiel  and  the  Minor  Prophets,  with  critical  notes.  His 
exegetical  writings  show  good  judgment,  and  have  met  with  de- 
served commendation.  Blayney,  professor  at  Oxford,  Biayney,  Green, 
was  noted  for  his  knowledge  of  Hebrew.  His  princi-  ^^^  weiis. 
pal  writings  are  a  dissertation  on  the  Seventy  Weeks  of  Daniel, 
and  a  new  version  of  Jeremiah,  Lamentations,  and  Zechariah,  with 
critical  and  philological  notes.  William  Green  was  the  author  of 
new  translations  of  Isaiah,  the  Psalms,  and  other  poetical  parts  of 
the  Old  Testament,  accompanied  with  notes.  Edward  Wells,  less 
widely  known  than  the  writers  just  mentioned,  published  in  the 
early  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  a  revised  translation  of  the 
New  Testament,  with  a  paraphrase  and  annotations.  He  was  also 
the  author  of  an  exposition  of  Daniel,  and  a  historical  geography 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  Samuel  Wesley  wrote  a  history 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  and  a  Latin  commen-       ^ 

Wesley. 

tary  on  the  Book  of  Job.  John  Wesley,  his  more  famous 
son,  prepared  and  published  a  volume  of  Explanatory  Notes  on  the 
New  Testament,  which  has  been  widely  circulated  among  his  fol- 
lowers, and  is  recognized  as  one  of  the  doctrinal  standards  of  Meth- 
odism. He  gives  the  Authorized  Version,  slightly  revised,  and  for 
many  of  his  short  and  suggestive  comments  acknowledges  his  great 
indebtedness  to  Bengel's  Gnomon  and  Doddridge's  Family  Expos- 
itor. His  notes  on  the  Old  Testament  are  too  meager  to  be  of  any 
considerable  value. 

The  devout  and  useful  cultivation  of  biblical  studies,  indicated 
by  such  works  as  those  mentioned  above,  furnish  an  English  Deism, 
interesting  evidence  of  the  faith  and  piety  of  multi-   French  infldei- 

°   .  ,  •      ■,  1  1  ity,    and    Ger- 

tudes  ;it  a  time  when  strong  sceptical  assaults  were  be-  man  uationai- 
ing  made  ui:)on  the  doctrines  of  revealed  religion.  It  ^^'"■ 
was  during  this  century  that  English  deism  reached  its  highest 
power  and  passed  into  decline.  French  infidelity  followed  in  its 
wake,  and  led  to  fanaticism  and  political  anarchy;  and  afterward, 
at  slower  pace,  the  more  refined  and  scholarly  rationalism  of  Ger- 
many made  its  advance,  and  affected  the  religious  thought  of  all 
Protestant  Christendom,  To  trace  these  currents  of  religious  life 
and  thought,  and  note  the  political,  philosophical,  and  dogmatical 
discussions  of  this  eventful  period,  falls  not  within  the  line  of  our 
purpose.  And  yet  to  understand  the  origin  of  the  exact  and 
searching  methods  of  Scx'ipture  exegesis  which  were  introduced  in 
the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth,  and  have  been  carried  to  still 
greater  perfection  in  the  nineteenth,  century,  one  needs  to  cast  at 
least  a  hasty  glance  over  the  growth  of  English  deism,  French 
unbelief,  and  German  speculative  thought,  which  unquestionably 


704  HISTORY   OF 

j)rovoked  and  prompted  a  more  thorough  study  of  tlie  Scriptures, 
both  in  Germany  and  Enghmd. 

We  have  ah'eady  noticed  the  influence  exerted  by  Spinoza  on 
oeisticai  writr-  religious  thought  (p,  694).  His  views  on  miracles  re- 
*^"-  ceived  another  form  of  presentation  in  Blount's  Life  of 

Apollonius  of  Tyana,  in  whicli  the  miracles  of  Christ  were  made  to 
suffer  disparagement  by  an  invidious  comparison  with  those  of  the 
Pythagorean  philosopher.  The  writings  of  Toland  and  Lord 
Shaftesbury  aim  to  assert  the  supremacy  of  reason,  and  to  ground 
morality  on  expediency  and  natural  right.  Collins  treated  more 
directly  the  interpretation  of  Scripture,  and  in  his  Discourse  on  the 
Grounds  and  Reasons  of  the  Christian  Religion  (London,  1724) 
Tuaintained  that  the  Jewish  expectation  of  the  Messiah  arose  only 
a  short  time  before  the  birth  of  Jesus,  and  that  the  New  Testament 
citations  of  Old  Testament  Messianic  prophecy  are  merely  fanciful 
accommodations  of  the  Hebrew  books,  and  at  best  mystical  and 
allegorical  portraitures  of  Christian  truth.  The  logic  of  this  work 
was  to  show  that  Christian  evidences  drawn  from  prophecy  are 
invalid.  Woolston's  Discourses  on  the  Mii-acles  were  another  crit- 
ical assault  upon  the  historical  verity  of  the  New  Testament,  and 
it  was  therein  boldly  asserted  that  the  narratives  of  our  Lord's 
miracles  Avere  full  of  extravagance  and  unreasonable  statem„ents, 
but  may  nevertheless  be  understood  as  figurative  representations  of 
spiritual  experience.  "  The  history  of  Jesus,  as  recorded  in  the  evan- 
gelists," says  Woolston,  "is  an  emblematical  representation  of  his 
spiritual  life  in  the  soul  of  man,  and  his  miracles  are  figures  of  his 
mysterious  operations.  The  four  gospels  are  in  no  part  a  literal 
story,  but  a  system  of  mystical  philosophy  or  theology."  '  Matthew 
Tindal  laboured  to  show  the  essential  perfection  of  natural  religion, 
and  denied  both  the  necessity  and  the  possibility  of  a  supernatural 
revelation.  These  positions,  together  with  much  adverse  criticism 
of  the  Scripture  records,  were  vigorously  maintained  in  his  cele- 
brated work  entitled  Christianity  as  Old  as  the  Creation,  or  the 
(iospel  a  Repul)lication  of  the  Religion  of  Nature.^  The  works  of 
Morgan  and  Chubb  follow  much  in  the  same  line,  and  in  a  measure 
supplement  the  arguments  of  Tindal.     The  philosophical  writings 

'  A  Discourse  on  the  Miracles  of  our  Saviour,  p.  05.     Sixth  edition.     London,  1729. 

'This  was  not  only  the  most  important  work  that  dci.sm  had  yet  produced,  com- 
posed with  care,  and  bearing  the  marks  of  thoughtful  study  of  the  chief  contem- 
porary arguments,  Christian  as  well  as  deist,  but  derives  an  interest  from  the  circum- 
stance that  it  was  the  book  to  which  more  than  to  any  other  single  work  Bishop 
Hiitler's  Analogy  was  designed  as  the  reply.  —  Farrar,  Critical  History  of  Free 
Thouglit,  p.  i;{8. 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION.  705 

of  Bolinffbroke  and  Hume  tended  likewise  to  unsettle  all  faith  in 
divine  revelation. 

The  writings  of  the  English  deists  were  answered  by  a  great 
number  of  divines  of  various  scholarship  and  ability.  Anti-deisticai 
Chief  among  them  Avere  Chandler,  Sherlock,  Butler —  writers, 
whose  immortal  Analogy  must  ever  stand  as  one  of  the  grandest 
monuments  of  human  thought — John  Conybeare,  Leland,  Waterland, 
and  Warburton — whose  celebrated  work  on  the  Divine  Leo-ation  of 
Moses  remains  to  this  day  an  invaluable  help  to  the  study  of  the 
Pentateuch.  In  fact  no  period  in  the  history  of  Christianity  wit- 
nessed in  so  short  a  space  such  a  number  and  variety  of  works  on 
the  evidences  of  revealed  religion  as  that  of  the  rise  and  decline  of 
English  deism. 

The  relation  of  English  deism  to  French  infidelity  is  very  obvi- 
ous. The  philosophy  of  Descartes  and  Spinoza  had,  French  unbe- 
indeed,  prepared  the  way  in  France  as  well  as  else-  ^^'^^• 
where  for  the  progress  of  sceptical  thought,  and  the  sensational 
2)hilosophy  of  Locke,  modified  and  adapted  to  the  French  mind  by 
Condillac,  tended  strongly  to  materialism  and  unbelief.  The  acute 
and  witty  Yoltaire,  for  three  years  an  exile  in  England,  appropri- 
ated such  products  of  the  deistical  writers  as  served  his  purpose, 
and  in  a  suj^erficial  and  flippant,  but  taking,  style,  disseminated 
them  with  most  demoralizing  effect  among  the  French  people. 
The  encyclopjedic  Diderot,  and  his  immediate  associates,  the  more 
cultivated  and  ])hilosophical  Rousseau,  and,  later,  the  brilliant  Yol- 
ney,  contt-ibuted  their  influence  to  the  same  destructive  movement, 
and  the  welcome  which  Frederick  the  Great  gave  to  men  of  this 
class,  making  the  Prussian  court  at  Berlin  a  place  of  refuge  for 
them  when  persecuted  at  home,  discloses  the  parental  relation  of 
French  unbelief  to  German  rationalism.  In  tracing  the  rise  of  the 
latter,  however,  we  need  to  go  back  a  little  and  note  tlie  origin  and 
progress  of  other  influences. 

A  new  impulse  was  given  to  biblical  studies  in  Germany  by  the 
foundinor  of  the  University  of  Halle  in  1694.  This  was 
due  mainly  to  the  influence  of  Spener,  the  father  of 
Pietism.  The  Protestant  Churches  had  fallen  into  a  cold,  formal 
orthodoxy,  and  the  symbols  and  sacraments  took  precedence  of 
scriptural  knowledge  and  personal  piety.  As  early  as  1675  Spener 
had  urged,  in  his  Pia  Desideria,  that  all  Christian  doctrine  should 
be  sought  in  a  faithful  study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  rather  than  in 
the  symbols  of  the  Church,  and  that  the  living  truths  of  God's 
word  should  be  brought  home  to  the  hearts  of  the  people.  Asso- 
ciated with  him  at  Halle  v.as  A.  H.  Francke,  who  had  previously 
45 


706  HISTORY   OP 

become  noted  at  Leipsic  by  his  exegetical  lectures.  Both  these 
men  were  eminent  as  preachers  and  abundant  in  pul|>it 
ministrations,  Francke's  exegetical  lectures  extended 
over  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  and  he  published 
treatises  on  the  interpretation  of  Scripture,  and  on  methods  of  the- 
ological study.  These  nol)le  leaders  of  Pietism  maintained  that  it 
is  the  first  duty  of  the  theologian  to  ascertain  the  true  meaning  of 
the  Scriptures,  not  from  traditional  beliefs,  but  from  a  critical  and 
grammatical  study  of  the  original  texts.  "The  theological  instruc- 
tion of  Francke  and  his  coadjutors  in  the  University  of  Ilalle," 
says  Hurst,  "was  very  influential.  Daring  the  first  thirty  years 
of  its  history  six  thousand  and  thirty-four  theologians  were  trained 
within  its  walls,  not  to  speak  of  the  multitudes  who  received  a 
thorough  academic  and  religious  instruction  in  the  Orphan  House. 
The  Oriental  Theological  College,  established  in  connexion  with  the 
univei'sity,  promoted  the  study  of  biblical  languages,  and  originated 
the  first  critical  edition  of  the  Hebrew  Bible.'" 

One  of  the  most  learned  men  of  Germany  was  J.  H.  Michaelis,  who 
The  Mi  haeiis  ^^^^  associated  with  Francke  in  establishing  the  Orient- 
family  of  wbii-  al  Theological  College  of  Halle,  and  was  editor  of  the 
caw  odis.  critical  Hebrew  Bible  above  referred  to.  He  devoted 
thirty  years  of  labour  to  the  preparation  of  this  work,  and  collated 
the  best  printed  editions  and  a  number  of  Hebrew  manuscripts. 
Along  with  it  was  published  his  Philologico-Exegetical  Annotations 
on  the  Hagiograpliy  (3  vols.  4to,  Ilalle,  IV'iO).  C.  B.  Michaelis, 
nephew  of  the  preceding,  was  professor  at  Halle  from  1713  in  1764, 
duriug  which  time  he  published  numerous  treatises  on  Hebrew  phi- 
lology, biblical  exegesis,  and  the  various  readings  of  the  Greek 
Testament.  He  assisted  his  uncle  in  the  preparation  of  his  Anno- 
tations on  the  llagiograp'iy.  His  son,  J.  D.  Michaelis,  became 
more  famous  as  a  theologian  and  biblical  scholar  tlian  any  other  of 
this  celebrated  family.  He  planned  the  expedition  into  the  Orient 
which  was  executed  by  Carsten  Niebuhr,  and  contributed  greatly* 
to  our  knowledge  of  the  Aral)ian  peninsula.  He  published  gram- 
mars of  the  Hebrew,  Chaldee,  Syraic,  and  Arabic  languages,  and 
various  other  philological  treatises,  together  with  valuable  works 
on  history,  geography,  chronology,  and  Jewish  antiquities.  He 
wrote  an  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  and  commentaries  on 
Ecclesiastes  nnd  First  .Maccabees.  His  greatest  and  best  known 
work  is  his  Mosaisches  Kecht  (G  vols.,  1770-75),  or  Commentaries  on 
the  Laws  of  Closes,  of  which  an  English  translation  lias  been  pub- 
lished by  Alexander  Smith  (4  vols.,  London,  1814).  With  all  liis 
*  History  of  Rationalism,  p.  97.     New  York,  18G5. 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION.  707 

greatness  as  a  scholar  and  critic  he  imbibed  many  of  the  rational- 
istic notions  of  his  time,  and  seems  to  have  been  deficient  in  relis"- 
ious  convictions  and  experience.  Pie  was  a  fair  specimen  of  the 
incipient  neology,  and  retained  the  outward  forms  of  orthodoxy, 
but  went  not  to  the  extremes  of  rationalism.  John  F.  and  John 
G.  Michaelis,  two  other  members  of  this  family,  were  also  distin- 
guished for  their  labours  in  biblical  science. 

John  Lawrence  von  Mosheim,  who  was  pre-eminent  for  his  con- 
tributions to  ecclesiastical  history,  and  has  been  deserv- 
edly honoured  for  placing  Church  history  on  a  truer 
scientific  basis  than  it  had  ever  attained  before,  was  also  the  author 
of  several  sound  and  useful  exegetical  works.  His  exposition  of 
First  Corinthians  and  the  two  Epistles  to  Timothy,  his  Sacred  Ob- 
servations (Amst.,  1721),  and  critical  treatment  of  select  passages 
of  the  New  Testament,  evince  rare  powers  of  criticism.  He 
showed  himself  a  master  in  nearly  every  department  of  theology. 

John  Benjamin  Koppe,  professor  of  theology  at  Gottingen,  pub- 
lished numerous  treatises  on  biblical  subjects,  and  com- 
menced, near  the  close  of  this  century,  a  critical  edition 
of  the  New  Testament.  He  lived  to  publish  only  two  volumes, 
embracing  Romans,  Galatians,  Ephesians,  and  Thessalonians.  His 
plan  was  to  furnish  a  revised  Greek  text  (which  agrees  closely  with 
that  of  Griesbach),  prolegomena  to  each  book,  critical  and  philolog- 
ical annotations,  and  excursus  on  difficult  passages.  The  work  was 
continued  on  the  same  plan  by  Heinrichs  and  Pott,  the  former  pub- 
lishing the  Acts,  Colossians,  Timothy,  Titus,  and  Philemon,  and  the 
latter  the  Epistles  of  Peter  and  Jude. 

Probably  the  most  distinguished  name  in  the  history  of  exegesis 

in   the    eighteenth    century  is   that   of   John   Augustus 

-r,  .  ,  T       .        •       •  •      -KT      •    m  •         Ernesti. 

Ernesti,   whose    Institutio  interpretis    Novi    lestamenti 

(Lips.,  1761),  or  Principles  of  New  Testament  Interpretation,  has 
been  accepted  as  a  standard  textbook  on  hermeneuties  by  four  gen- 
erations of  biblical  scholars.  "  He  is  regarded,"  says  Hagenbach, 
"as  the  founder  of  a  new  exegetical  school,  whose  principle  simply 
was  that  the  Bible  must  be  rigidly  explained  according  to  its  own 
language,  and,  in  this  explanation,  it  must  neither  be  bribed  by  any 
external  authority  of  the  Church,  nor  by  our  own  feeling,  nor  by  a 
sportive  and  allegorizing  fancy — which  had  frequently  been  the  case 
with  the  mystics — nor,  finally,  by  any  philosophical  system  what- 
ever. He  here  united  in  the  main  with  Hugo  Grotius,  who  had 
laid  down  similar  principles  in  the  seventeenth  century.  Ernesti 
was  a  philologian.  He  had  occupied  himself  just  as  enthusiastically 
with  the  ancient  classics  of  Rome  and  Greece  as  with  the  Bible, 


708  HISTORY  OF 

and  claimed  that  the  same  exegetical  laws  should  be  observed  in 
the  one  case  as  in  the  other.  He  was  perfectly  right  in  this  re- 
spect; even  the  Reformers  wished  the  same  thing.  His  error  here 
was,  perhaps,  in  overlooking  too  much  the  fact  that,  in  order  to 
perceive  the  religious  truths  of  the  Scriptures,  we  must  not  only 
understand  the  meaning  of  a  declaration  in  its  relations  to  language 
and  history,  but  that  we  must  also  spiritually  appropriate  it  by 
feelingly  transposing  ourselves  to  it,  and  by  seeking  to  understand 
it  from  itself.  Who  will  deny  that,  in  order  to  understand  the 
epistles  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  we  must  adopt  from  the  very  outset 
a  mode  of  view  different  from  that  which  we  would  employ  in 
order  to  understand  the  epistles  of  Cicero,  since  the  circle  of  ideas 
of  these  two  men  is  very  different  ?  Religious  writings  can  be 
perfectly  understood  only  by  an  anticipating  spirit,  which  peers 
through  the  logical  and  grammatical  web  of  the  thoughts  to  the 
depth  below.  .  .  .  The  principle  that  we  must  expound  the  Scriptures 
like  every  other  book  could  at  least  be  so  misapprehended  that  it 
might  be  placed  in  the  same  rank  with  the  other  writings  of 
antiquity,  and  the  assistance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  is  the  only 
guide  to  the  depths  of  the  Scriptures,  be  regarded  as  superfluous. 
As  for  Ernesti  personally,  he  was  orthodox,  like  ^[ichoelis  and 
Mosheim.  He  even  defended  the  Lutheran  view  of  the  Lord's 
Supper.  And  yet  these  men,  and  others  of  like  character,  are  dis- 
tinguished from  their  orthodox  predecessors,  by  their  insisting  upon 
independence,  by  struggling  for  sobriety,  and,  if  you  will  allow, 
for  dryness  also.  But,  with  all  this,  they  were  further  distinguished 
from  their  predecessors  by  a  certain  freedom  and  mildness  of  judg- 
ment which  men  had  not  been  accustomed  to  fiu'l  in  theologians. 
Without  any  desire  or  wish  on  their  own  part  they  effected  a  tran- 
sition to  a  new  theological  method  of  thought,  which  soon  passed 
beyond  the  limits  of  their  own  labours." ' 

Ernesti  was  also  the  author  of  a  volume  of  exegetical  essays 
entitled  Opuscula  pliilologica-critica  (Amst.,  1762),  and  the  Neue 
Theologische  Bibliothek  (14  volumes),  which  greatly  promoted  the 
interests  of  theological  literature  in  Germany.  The  ])rinciples 
so  ably  set  forth  by  P]rnesti  were  further  elaborated  toward  the 
close  of  this  century  by  Karl  Augustus  Keil,  whose  vari- 

K.  A.  G.  Keil.  .,        •  1  -1  1-      ,   1  .        /  \ 

ous  contributions  to  biblical  hermeneutics  (comp.  p.  203) 
did  much  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  solid  and  enduring  methods 
of  exegesis  which  are  now  generally  prevalent  in  Germany,  En- 
gland, and  America.     The  refined  and  gifteil  Herder  did  much  for 

'  History  of  the  rimrcli   in   the  Eiglilocnth  ;viul  Nineteenth  Centuries,  vol.   i,  pp. 
259-2G1.     English  tranalation  by  Hurst.     New  York,  180'J. 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION.  709 

the  cause  of  biblical  science  by  emphasising  tlie  human  element  in 

the  Scriptures.     In  his  treatise  on  the  Spirit  of  Hebrew 

.  .    .  Herder 

Poetry    (Dessau,    1782)    he   aimed   to    exhibit   the    real 

beauties,  the  deep  poetical  fervour,  and  glowing  oriental  imagery 
of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures.  In  other  publications  he  traced 
the  influence  of  Parseeism  on  the  biblical  writers,  expounded  the 
Apocalypse  as  having  been  fulfilled  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
and  dwelt  with  peculiar  pleasure,  on  the  Epistles  of  James  and  Judo 
as  the  productions  of  real  brothers  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  Though  in- 
fluenced by  the  rationalism  prevalent  at  the  court  of  Weimar,'  his 
labours  in  the  department  of  biblical  literature  were  far  more  itse- 
ful  than  harmful.  It  was  well  to  have  attention  called  to  the  hu- 
man as  well  as  to  the  divine  elements  in  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

Contemporaneous  with  the  above-mentioned  critics  and  scholars 
were  others  of  a  more  decided  rationalistic  bent,  and  woif  and 
both  the  old  rigid  orthodoxy  and  the  declining  Pietism  Lange. 
of  the  period  met  with  opposing  tides  of  thought.  The  philosophy 
of  Christian  von  Wolf,  which  was  but  a  modification  and  popular 
presentation  of  the  theories  of  Leibnitz,  introduced  a  disturbing 
element  at  Halle,  It  found  a  strong  opponent  in  Joachim  Lange, 
an  intimate  friend  of  Francke,  who  was  also  noted  for  his  comments 
on  most  of  the  books  of  the  Bible.  The  later  Pietists,  revolting 
from  the  Wolfian  claims  for  reason,  opposed  to  it  a  blind  emotional 
faith,  which  speedily  deteriorated  into  superstitious  mys-  Degenerate 
ticism  and  extravagance.  Their  capricious  methods  of  Pietism. 
interpretation  are  represented  in  the  Berleburg  Bible,  which  unites 
a  running  exposition  with  a  new  translation,  and  assumes  to  set 
forth  the  hidden  spiritual  sense  of  the  Word.  Such  mystical  trifling 
with  the  natural  sense  of  Scripture  could  not  fail  to  provoke  reac- 
tion, which  might  easily  run  to  an  opposite  extreme.  In  1735  ihe 
Wertheim  Bible  appeared,  the  translation  and  notes  of  which  were 
a  manifest  attempt  to  interpret  the  Scriptures  according  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Wolfian  philosophy.  Baumgarten,  a  disciple  of  Wolf, 
and  his  successor  at  Plalle,  wrote  sevi  ral  critical  and  exegetical 
works,  and  prepared  the  way  for  the  rise  of  Gei-man  rationalism, 

'  At  the  end  of  the  last  century  there  was  one  spot  which  became  the  very  focus  of 
intellectual  life.  The  court  of  Karl  August,  at  Weimar,  insignificant  in  political  im- 
portance, was  great  in  the  history  of  the  human  mind.  There  were  gathered  most  of 
the  mighty  spirits  of  the  golden  age  of  German  literature— Herder,  Wieland,  Goethe, 
Schiller,  Jean  Paul:  a  constellation  of  intellect  unequalled  since  the  court  of  Feriara 
in  the  days  of  Alphonso.  The  influence  made  itself  felt  in  the  adjacent  university  of 
Jena,  and  this  little  seminary  became  from  that  time  for  about  twenty  years,  until 
the  foundation  of  Berlin,  the  first  university  in  Germany.— Farrar,  Critical  History  of 
Free  Thought,  p.  228. 


710  HISTORY    OF 

of  which  Semler,  his  pupil,  is  commonly  regarded  as  more  directly 
the  father. 

John  Solomon  Semler  was  born  and  reared  under  the  influences 
of  Pietism,  but  from  early  childhood  showed  little  in- 
clination to  adopt  its  peculiar  dialect  and  methods.  lie 
went  to  Halle  the  year  before  Lange  died,  and  there  received  many 
kind  attentions  from  the  Pietists;  but  he  declined  to  follow  their 
counsels,  and  soon  became  the  f^^vourite  scholar  of  Baumgarten. 
Early  recognising  the  conflict  between  his  subjective  notions  and 
the  current  dogmas  of  the  Church,  he  began  to  distinguish  between 
religion  and  theology.  One's  private  religion,  he  fancied,  might 
be  largely  a  matter  of  personal  taste,  and  should  be  cultivated  as 
individual  feeling  and  the  dictates  of  reason  prompted.  In  the 
elaboration  of  his  views  he  propounded  the  so-called  Accommoda- 
tion theory  of  expounding  the  Scriptures  (see  above,  p.  166),  and 
distinguished  between  what  is  local  and  temporary  and  what  is  uni- 
versal and  permanent  in  the  divine  revelation.  Large  portions  of 
the  Scriptures,  including  many  entire  books,  were  set  aside  as  of  no 
authority.  Observing  that  Samaritans,  Jews,  and  the  Septuagint 
translators  differed  in  the  number  of  books  which  they  accepted  as 
sacred,  he  rejected  the  traditional  idea  of  an  inspired  canon  of 
Scripture,  and  made  reason  and  his  own  judgment  tlie  test  by  which 
to  determine  what  was  and  what  was  not  inspired.  Much  in  the 
Bible  was  regarded  as  purely  ephemeral,  a  mere  accommodation  to 
the  prejudices  and  barbarism  of  ancient  times.  The  doctrine  of 
angels  and  demons  was  but  an  accommodation  to  prevailing  errors. 
^lost  of  these  views  were  set  forth  in  Semler's  various  jjublications 
on  biblical  interpretation  and  the  free  use  of  the  canon,  works 
abounding  with  sound  and  excellent  observations,  but  so  mixed 
with  pernicious  errors  that,  in  other  hands,  they  were  made  instru- 
ments for  the  destruction  of  all  faith  in  divine  revelation.  Semler 
was  not  the  founder  of  a  school,  but  his  writings  gave  a  mighty 
impulse  to  the  critical  methods  of  interpretation  which  were  then 
becoming  current.  He  scattered  doubts  and  set  afloat  many  scep- 
tical notions.  "By  the  critical  inquiry  into  which  he  was  constant- 
ly drawn  further  and  further,"  observes  Ilagenbach,  "he  doubted 
much  which  had  hitherto  stood  fast  and  had  lately  passed  as  au- 
tlientic,  and  threw  much  overboard  which  it  was  afterward  believed 
necessary  to  gather  carefully  up  again."  ' 

Semler's  beautiful  piety  preserved  him  from  the  evil  effects  of 
GrowHi  of  Ru-  his  own  theories,  and  he  himself  was  surprised  at  the 
tioiiiiiism.  „«^(.  others  made  of  his  ci"itical  principles.     Tliere  were 

'  Hist,  of  the  Church  in  the  Eighteenth  and  Nineteenth  Centuries,  vol.  i,  p.  2G6. 


BIBLICAL   INl'ERPRETATION.  7ll 

men  in  Germany  who  were  thoroughly  infected  with  the  leaven  of 
English  deism  and  French  infidelity,  and  they  were  not  slow  to 
appropriate  Sender's  destructive  methods  for  the  propagation  of 
neology  and  unbelief  among  the  people.  Of  this  class  were  Edel- 
mann  and  Bahrdt,  whose  writings  breathed  the  most  oifensive  spirit 
of  hostility  to  all  accepted  Christian  doctrine.  The  Allgemeine 
Deutsche  Bibliothek  (Universal  German  Library),  projected  and 
managed  by  Nicolai  (1765-92),  served  as  a  most  powerful  organ 
for  the  dissemination  of  rationalistic  opinions.  The  publication  of 
the  Wolfenbiittel  Fragments  by  Lessing  (1774-'78)  contributed  still 
more  to  the  spread  of  scepticism  and  infidelity.  They  extolled  the 
deists,  glorified  human  reason,  and  treated  the  miracles  of  the 
Bible  as  a  string  of  incredible  myths  and  legends,  which  an  intelli- 
gent age  ought  to  reject.  To  the  same  class  of  publications  be- 
longed Teller's  Worterbuch  des  neuen  Testament  (Lexicon  of  the 
New  Testament),  which  assumed  to  define  the  ideas  rather  tlian  the 
words  of  Scripture.  Repent,  according  to  this  authority,  means 
"  to  become  better;"  to  convert  is  "  to  restore  to  a  righteous  disposi- 
tion;" and  atonement  signifies  "  the  union  of  men  among  themselves 
in  one  religion."  It  was  a  worthy  companion  of  the  Wertheim 
translation  of  the  Bible. 

Thus  it  appears  that  at  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century 
rationalism  was  dominant  over  the  leading  minds  of  scholarly  form 
Germany.  Here  and  there  a  voice  was  heard  protest-  of  Rationalism. 
ing  against  these  innovations  in  theology,  and  occasionally  a  bold 
writer  was  suppressed  by  the  civil  power.  A  great  diversity  of 
views  appeared.  "  The  position  of  rationalism  during  the  last 
quarter  of  the  eighteenth  century,"  says  Hurst,  "  was  surrounded 
with  circumstances  of  the  most  conflicting  nature.  Had  it  been 
advocated  by  a  few  more  such  ribald  characters  as  Bahrdt,  its  career 
would  soon  have  been  terminated  from  the  mere  want  of  respec- 
tability. But  had  it  assumed  a  more  serious  ph.ise,  and  become  the 
protege  of  such  pious  men  as  Seraler  was  at  heart,  there  would  have 
been  no  limit  to  the  damage  it  might  inflict  upon  the  cause  of 
Protestantism,  And  there  were  indications  favourable  to  either 
result.  However,  by  some  plan  of  fiendish  malice,  scepticism  re- 
ceived all  the  support  it  could  ask  from  the  learned,  the  power- 
ful, and  the  ambitious.  Here  and  there  around  the  horizon  could 
be  seen  some  rising  literary  star  that,  for  the  hour,  excited  uni- 
versal attention.  His  labour  was  to  impugn  the  contents  of  the 
Scriptures  and  insinuate  against  the  moral  purity  of  the  writers 
themselves.  Another  candidate  for  theological  glory  appeared, 
and  reproached  the  style  of  the  inspired  record.     A  third  came 


712  HISTORY   OF 

vauntingly  forward  with  his  geograjDhical  discoveries  and  scientific 
data,  and  raised  the  accommodation  theory  so  many  more  stories 
higher  tlian  Semler  had  left  it,  that  it  almost  threatened  to  fall  of 
its  own  weight,"  * 

At  the  close  of  this  century  we  meet  with  a  name  that  towers 
above  most  others  of  his  time,  and  marks  an  epoch  in  the 
liistory  of  philosophical  criticism.  Emmanuel  Kant  con- 
tributed little  directly  to  biblical  exegesis,  but  his  philosoj^hical 
principles  have  influenced  three  generations  of  biblical  critics.  His 
attempt  to  construct  a  system  of  moral  interpretation  has  been 
sufficiently  noticed  in  a  previous  part  of  this  volume  (p.  16V).  The 
relation  of  his  philosophy  to  religion  and  the  Scriptures  is  thus 
concisely  stated  by  Farrar:  "He  detected,  as  he  supposed,  innate 
forms  of  thought  in  the  mental  structure,  which  form  the  condition 
under  which  knowledge  is  possible.  AVhen  he  applied  his  system 
to  give  a  philosophy  of  ethics  and  religion,  he  asserted  nobly  the 
law  of  duty  written  in  the  heart,  but  identified  it  with  religion. 
Religious  ideas  Avere  regarded  as  true  regulatively,  not  specula- 
tively. Revelation  was  reunited  with  reason  by  being  resolved  into 
the  natural  religion  of  the  heart.  Accordingly,  the  moral  effect  of 
this  j)hilosophy  was  to  expel  the  French  materialism  and  illuminism, 
and  to  give  depth  to  the  moral  perceptions :  its  religious  efi'ect  was 
to  strengthen  the  appeal  to  reason  and  the  moral  judgment  as  the 
test  of  religious  truth ;  to  render  miraculous  communication  of 
moral  instruction  useless,  if  not  absurd ;  and  to  reawaken  the  at- 
tempt, which  had  been  laid  aside  since  the  Wolfian  philosoi)liy,  of 
endeavoring  to  find  a  philosophy  of  religion.  From  this  time  in 
German  theology  we  find  the  existence  of  the  twofold  movcmont: 
the  critical  one,  the  lawful  descendant  of  Semler,  examining  the 
historic  revelation ;  and  the  philosophical  one,  the  offshoot  of  the 
system  of  Kant,  seeking  for  a  philosophy  of  religion."* 

The  development  of  speculative  philoso])hy  through  Jacobi,  Her- 
bart,  Fichte,  Schelling,  and  Hegel  exerted  a  profound  influence 
u|)on  the  critical  minds  of  Germany,  and  affected  the  exegetical 
style  and  methods  of  many  of  the  great  biblical  scholars  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  'J'he  influence  of  this  ])hilosophy  has  tended 
to  make  the  German  mind  intensely  subjective,  and  has  led  many 
theologians  to  view  both  history  and  doctrines  in  llieir  relations 
to  some  preconceived  principle  rather  than  in  their  practical  bear- 
ings on  human  life. 

'  History  of  Riitionalism,  pp.  148,  ItO.     New  York,  1865. 
2  Critical  Uistory  of  Free  Thought,  pp.  229,  230. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPIIETATION.  713 


CHAPTER  IX. 

EXEGESIS    OP    THE    NINETEENTH    CENTURY. 

The  progress  of  biblical  science  daring  the  present  century  has 
been  conspicuous  above  that  of  any  former  period  of  -^^.^^^^^^  pj.^,,, 
its  histoi-y.  The  century  opened  rich  with  the  results  ress  of  knowi- 
of  previous  philological  and  theological  research.  The  ^^  ' 
lonar-buried  treasures  of  Hebrew  and  classical  literature  were  made 
accessible  to  all  scholars.  Questions  of  politics,  philosophy,  and 
religion  began  to  be  sifted  with  a  freedom  and  fulness  of  discussion 
unknown  in  Europe  before.  Political  revolutions  and  the  wide- 
spread popular  demand  for  liberty  of  thought  and  speech  prompted 
to  the  acquisition  of  knowledge,  and  gave  encouragement  to  all 
educational  and  literary  enterprises.  New  departments  of  litera- 
ture and  science  were  gradually  developed;  new  inventions  and 
improvements  on  old  ones  greatly  facilitated  the  means  of  scientific 
research ;  geological  investigation,  comparative  philology,  the  deci- 
phering of  ancient  monumental  inscriptions,  and  uncovering  of 
entire  libraries  of  oriental  history  and  literature  contemporary  with 
the  Hebrew  Scriptures;  the  exploration  of  Bible  lands,  the  dis- 
covery and  collation  of  ancient  manuscripts,  and  the  principles  and 
processes  of  textual  criticism  have  become  so  many  distinct  sciences, 
and  are  now  prosecuted  with  enthusiasm  by  the  ablest  men  of 
Christendom. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  century  rationalism  had  well  nigh  taken 
possession  of  the  best  minds  of  Germany.      Eichhorn    ^  ^  ^  _ 

^  .  .  ^         .         J.  G.  Eicliborn. 

succeeded  J.  D.  Michaelis  at  the  university  ot  (jottin- 
gen,  and  lectured  and  wrote  extensively  on  oriental  literature  and 
the  exeg-esis  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  His  Introduction  to 
the  Scriptures  and  his  commentary  on  the  Apocalypse  were  re- 
markable for  their  bold  rationalistic  criticism.  Explicit  statements 
of  the  sacred  writers  were  set  aside  or  explained  away  by  the  most 
arbitrary  assumptions.  The  Mosaic  history  was  treated  as  consist- 
ing largely  of  ancient  sagas  or  legends.  Its  miraculous  narratives 
were  explained  as  the  vivid  portrayal  of  natural  events  which  was 
alleged  to  be  characteristic  of  all  ancient  records  of  primeval  and  un- 
historic  times.  A  happy,  accident  or  a  joyous  thought  was  wont  to 
be  conceived  and  spoken  of  as  the  appearance  or  the  salutation  of  an 
angel.     The  smoke,  fire,  and  quaking  of  Mount  Sinai  (Exod.  xix,  18) 


714  HISTORY  OF 

were  merely  a  fire  kindled  by  Moses  himself  for  the  purpose  of  im- 
pressing the  people  with  awe,  and  the  happy  coincidence  of  a  terrible 
thunderstorm.  Eichhoni  insisted  that  all  ancient  history,  whether 
Jewish  or  pagan,  should  be  treated  alike,  and  that  all  miraculous 
elements  should  be  eliminated  by  rational  methods  of  interpretation. 
This  naturalistic  method  of  expounding  the  Scriptures  w^as  car- 
ried out  in  greater  detail  and  applied  with  a  more  risrid 

Puulus.  . 

consistency  to  the  gospel  narratives  by  Paulus,  professor 
at  Jena,  and  subsequently  at  Heidelberg.  His  philologico-critical 
and  historical  commentary  on  the  New  Testament  is  one  of  the 
most  notable  attempts  on  record  to  explain  aw^ay  every  supernatural 
event  narrated  in  the  Christian  Scriptures  (see  above,  p.  168). 
Similar  views  were  advocated  about  the  same  period  by  Henke, 
Ammon,  Wegscheider,  and  the  Swiss  rationalist,  Schulthess. 

About  this  time,  also,  the  rationalistic  criticism  of  the  Pentateuch 
Criticism  of  the  took  a  notable  turn,  and  inaugurated  a  controversy 
Pentateuch.  which  has  Continued  to  the  present  time.  The  docu- 
mentary hypothesis  of  the  composition  of  Genesis,  propounded  as 
early  as  1753  by  Astruc,  maintained  that  the  book  is  made  up  of 
twelve  documents  of  different  authorship,  of  wdiich  the  two  principal 
ones  are  the  Elohistic  and  Jehovistic,  conspicuous  for  the  use  they 
make  of  the  divine  names.  A  similar  theory,  generally  known  as 
the  fragmentary  hypothesis,  was  set  forth  with  much  ability  by 
J.  S.  Vater  in  his  Commentary  on  the  Pentateuch  (Halle,  1802-b). 
According  to  this  theory  the  whole  Pentateuch  consists  of  a  num- 
ber of  fragments  loosely  strung  together.  Its  nucleus  was  a  collec- 
tion of  laws  made  in  the  time  of  David  and  Solomon,  to  w'hich  a 
variety  of  other  fragments  was  added  between  the  time  of  Josiah 
and  the  Babylonian  exile.  Essentially  the  same  hypothesis  was 
maintained  by  Ilartmann  in  his  Linguistic  Introduction  to  the 
Study  of  the  Books  of  the  Old  Testament  (Rostock,  1818).  These 
older  theories  were  gradually  superseded  by  that  commonly  called 
the  suj)plenientary  hypothesis,  which  recognises  one  original  funda- 
mental document  to  which  various  interpolations  and  supplements 
were  subse(]uently  added.  The  most  prominent  advocates  of  this 
theory  were  Stiihelin,  Tuch,  Lengerke,  Von  Bohlen,  and  De  Wette. 

In  connexion  with  this  free  handling  of  the  Pentateuch  the  niyth- 
Mythicai  inter-  i^-al  interpretation  of  the  biblical  narratives  gradually 
pretations.  developed.  The  philologist  Ileyne  maintained  that  the 
early  history  of  all  nations  is  enwrapped  in  myths;  Semler  sug- 
gested that  the  stories  of  Samson  and  Esther  were  myths,  and  Gabler 
explained  the  account  of  the  fall  of  man  in  much  the  same  way. 
The  Mosaic  narrative  of  creation  was  placed  on  a  par  with  the 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  715 

cosmogonies  of  the  heathen  world.  In  1820  G.  L.  Bauer  published 
his  Hebrew  Mythology  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  and  argued 
therein  that  it  is  highly  inconsistent  and  unphilosophical  to  allow 
the  mythical  element  in  the  early  history  of  all  other  nations,  and 
yet  deny  it  in  the  Hebrew  records.  Other  writers  put  forth  similar 
views,  and  by  one  and  another  myths  were  conceived  and  classified 
as  historical,  philosophical,  and  poetical,  according  to  the  manner 
of  their  origin  and  development.  But  it  was  the  skilful  hand  of 
David  Friedrich  Strauss  that  gave  fullest  presentation  The  work  of 
of  the  mythical  interpretation,  and  boldly  applied  it  to  Strauss. 
the  gospel  history.  His  subjection  to  the  Hegelian  philosophy,  and 
the  consequent  treatment  of  scriptural  narratives  in  accord  with 
foregone  conclusions,  are  apparent  from  the  following  passage  at 
the  beginning  of  his  celebrated  Life  of  Jesus:  "The  divine  cannot 
so  have  happened  (not  immediately,  not  in  forms  so  rude);  or,  that 
which  has  so  happened  cannot  have  been  divine.  And  if  a  recon- 
ciliation be  sought  by  means  of  interpretation,  it  will  be  attempted 
to  prove  either  that  the  divine  did  not  manifest  itself  in  the  manner 
related,  which  is  to  deny  the  historical  validity  of  the  ancient  Scrip- 
tures; or,  that  the  actual  occurrences  were  not  divine,  which  is  to 
explain  away  the  absolute  contents  of  these  books."'  With  this 
dilemma  as  a  governing  principle,  the  grammatico-historical  inter- 
pretation of  miraculous  narratives  became  essentially  impossible, 
and  Strauss  proceeded  to  construct  with  great  learning  and  inge- 
nuity the  mythical  interpretation,  which  we  have  sufficiently  out- 
lined in  a  former  part  of  this  work  (pp.  168-170).  The  publication 
of  Strauss'  Leben  Jesu  (in  1835)  produced  a  most  wonderful  sensa- 
tion, and  marked  a  new  epoch  in  biblical  and  theological  criticism. 
Scarcely  a  work  on  the  gospel  history  has  since  aj^peared  in  which 
there  is  not  some  notice  taken  of  its  propositions.  The  replies  to  it 
from  various  divines  were  almost  numberless,  and  constitute  a  sf)e- 
cial  department  of  theological  literature. 

A  few  years  after  the  work  of  Strauss  appeared,  C.  H.  Weisse 

published  his  Evangelical  History,  criticallv  and  philo- 

^  *■  C.  H.  Weisse. 

sopliically  treated  (2  vols.,  Lpz.,  1838).     Its  method  of 

treating   the    gospel   narratives,   while  adopting   substantially  the 

principles  of  Strauss,  might  not  improperly  be  called  the  idealistic. 

Persons  and  events  are  regarded  as  symbolical  representations  of 

great  religious  truths.     John  the  Baptist  represents  the  whole  body 

of  Jewish  prophets  in  their  relations  to  Christ.     The  genealogies  of 

Jesus  in  Matthew  and  Luke  are  merely  expressive  of  the  outward 

historical  connexion  of  the  old  Israelitish  monarchy  and  the  Christian 

'  Introduction,  S  1. 


716  HISTORY   OF 

system  of  salvation.     In  short,  the  whole  gospel  history  is  but  an 

ideal  representation  of  the  divine  process  by  which  God  reveals 

himself  subjectively  in  man  through  all  periods  of  the  world's  his- 

toiy,  and  the  person  and  character  of  Jesus  exhibits  this  revelation 

in  highest  perfection.     And  yet  all  this  wonderful  portraiture  nf 

divine  truth  was  the  product,  as  in  the  mythical  theory,  of  the 

imagination  and  loving  devotion  of  the  followers  of  Jesus,  upon 

whom  his  personal  excellence  and  magnetic  power  as  a  healer  of 

diseases  had  made  a  profound  impression. 

This  philosophical  method  of  developing  history  out  of  the  inner 

reliffious  consciousness  of  an  imao^iiuitive  and  uncritical 
Bruno  Baur.  ^  .  ^  i      t-» 

age  was  earned  out  to  even  a  greater  extreme  by  Bruno 

Bam-  in  his  Critique  of  John's  Gospel  (1840),  and  his  three  volumes 
on  the  Synoptic  Gospels  (1841-42).  He  boldly  denied  the  existence 
of  Messianic  expectations  at  the  time  of  Jesus'  birth,  and  in  the 
same  reckless  and  arbitrary  way  assumed  to  set  aside  any  statements 
of  the  gospel  history  which  appeared  inconsistent  with  his  specu- 
lative tlieories. 

The  founder  of  what  is  commonly  known  as  the  new  Tubingen 
F.  c.  Baur  and  '^^'^ool  of  theology  was  F.  C.  Baur,  who,  before  the 
the  Tubingen  appearance  of  Strauss'  Life  of  Jesus,  had  attacked  the 
authenticity  of  some  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. In  18:)5  he  published  a  treatise  on  the  Pastoral  Epistles  in 
which  he  maintained  that  (T.ilatians,  Corinthians,  and  Romans  were 
the  only  genuine  productions  of  the  Apostle  Paul.  In  1845  ap- 
peared his  work  on  Paul  the  Apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  in  1847 
his  Critical  Examination  of  the  Canonical  Gospels.  In  these  and 
other  works  of  similar  character  Baur  endeavoured  to  show  that 
the  New  Testament  books  Avere  polemical  documents  Avritten  in  the 
interest  of  different  factions  of  the  early  Church.  He  especially 
assumed  to  discover  in  these  documents  a  hostility  between  the 
Petrine  and  Pauline  parties.  These  parties  continued  their  antag- 
onism until  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  when  the  Petrine  or 
Judaic  faction  yielded  some  of  its  rigidity,  and  by  mutual  ccmces- 
sions  the  two  parties  became  united  in  one  catholic  Church.  Other 
theologians  belonging  to  the  Tubingen  school,  and  agreeing  with 
Baur  in  his  main  line  of  argument,  though  arriving  at  conclusions 
somewhat  diiferent  from  each  other,  are  Edward  Zellcr,  Albert 
Schwegler,  Kostlin,  Ililgenfeld,  and  Volkmar.  These  writers,  follow- 
ing the  Hegelian  philosophy,  disallow  any  truly  miraculous  events  in 
the  gospel  history,  regard  Christianity  as  an  offshoot  of  Judaism, 
and  deny  the  authenticity  of  all  the  i)()oks  of  the  New  Testament 
except  the  four  Pauline  epistles  nanied  above. 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  717 

The  rationalistic  school  of  French  critics  has  been  led  in  recent 
years  by  such  men  :is  Reville,  Scherer,  Pecaut,  Rouge-  French  critical 
raont,  and  Colani.  More  famous  than  any  of  these  is  school. 
Ernest  Renan,  whose  Life  of  Jesus  (Paris,  1863)  is  a  brilliant  por- 
traiture of  the  gospel  narrative  according  to  naturalistic  principles. 
The  man  Jesus  lived,  and  did  many  extraordinary  things,  but  was  a 
most  susceptible  Jewish  enthusiast,  who  gradually  became  possessed 
with  the  idea  that  he  was  to  be  the  chosen  Redeemer  of  Israel.  His 
disciples  participated  in  his  magnetic  enthusiasm,  and,  after  his 
death,  magnified  his  work,  and  constructed  out  of  current  legends 
and  their  own  imagination  the  marvellous  stories  which  we  now  find 
in  the  gospel  records. 

Such  bold  and  reckless  criticism  could  not  fail  to  call  out  earnest 
and  powerful  answers,  and  there  have  not  been  want-  German  Ra- 
in ff,  during  the  prosrress  of  the  century,  men  of  ample   tionaiism  pro- 

moted  more 
learning  and  ability  to  meet  the  new  issues  and  defend   thorough     in- 

the  faith  of  the  Church.     The  entire  rationalistic  move-  vestigation. 

ment  in  biblical  criticism,  from  Semler  onward,  served  to  develop  a 

more  tluorough  and  scientific  treatment   of  the  inspired  writings 

than  they  had  ever  before  received.     Scholars  of  all  parties  were 

led  to  examine  afresh  the  earliest  sources  of  history,  and  to  study 

with  strictest  care  the  original  texts  of  the  Bible  and  all  questions 

bearing  on  their  genuineness  and  authenticity. 

The  man  who  more  than  any  other  initiated  a  reaction  against 

the  rationalism  current  at  the  beginning  of  this  cen- 

„   ,  ,    .  ,  /•   .1      ^     ^         (•  £    Schleiermacher. 

tury  was  Schleiermacher,  one  or  the  first  professors  or 

the  University  of  Berlin  (1810).  And  yet  Schleiermacher  was  far 
from  orthodox  in  his  teaching.  He  was  neither  strictly  evangel- 
ical nor  rationalistic,  but  combined  in  himself  elements  of  both. 
"  Gifted  with  an  acute  and  penetrating  intellect,  capable  of  grap- 
pling with  the  highest  problems  of  philosophy  and  the  minutest 
details  of  criticism,  he  could  sympathize  with  the  intellectual  move- 
ment of  the  old  rationalism;  while  his  fine  moral  sensibility,  the 
depth  and  passionateness  of  his  sympathy,  the  exquisite  delicacy  of 
his  taste,  and  the  brilliancy  of  his  imagination,  were  in  j^erfect  har- 
mony with  the  literary  and  aesthetic  revival  which  was  commenc- 
ing. German  to  the  very  soul,  he  possessed  an  enthusiastic  sympa- 
thy with  the  great  literary  movements  of  his  age,  philosophical, 
classical,  or  romantic." '  His  most  usefid  service  was  to  expose  the 
fallacy  that  religion  is  attainable  by  reason,  or  is  any  way  depen- 
dent on  culture.  He  showed  that  vital  piety  is  a  matter  of  the 
heart,  and  consists  in  the  consciousness  of  God  in  the  soul,  and  of 
'  Farrar,  Critical  History  of  Free  Thought,  p.  242. 


718  HISTORY   OF 

absolute  dependence  upon  him.  This  doctrine  was  a  potent  anti- 
dote to  the  current  rationalism  which  would  bring  everything  in 
religion  and  theology  to  the  test  of  reason.  Schleierraacher's  prin- 
cipal works  are  devoted  to  dogmatic  and  practical  theology.  But 
he  published  a  commentary  on  the  Epistles  to  Timothy  (1807),  and 
lectured  on  hermeneutics  and  biblical  introduction.  In  his  methods 
of  interpretation  he  moved  much  in  the  ways  of  the  rationalists. 
His  doctrine  of  inspiration  was  loose,  and  his  view  of  miracles 
doubtful.  lie  treated  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  as  having  no 
divine  authority,  and  as  being  important  chiefly  because  of  their 
historical  relations  to  Christianity.  His  disciplee,  accordingly, 
branched  off  into  different  schools,  and  in  their  attitude  toward 
evangelical  doctrine  were  negative  or  positive,  or  followed  a  middle 
course  between  the  two,  and  each  school  could  appeal  in  defence  of 
its  positions  to  the  teachings  of  the  master  whom  they  all  honoured. 
Schleiermacher  founded  no  school  of  theology,  but  he  kindled  an 
influence  that  affected  all  schools.  "  Whether  we  view  him,"  says 
Farrar,  "in  his  own  natural  gifts  and  susceptibilities;  in  the  aim  of 
his  life;  in  his  mixture  of  reason  and  love,  of  philosophy  and  criti- 
cism, of  enthusiasm  and  wisdom,  of  orthodoxy  and  heresy;  or  re- 
gard the  transitory  character  of  his  work,  the  permanence  of  his 
influence,  Church  history  offers  no  parallel  to  him  since  the  days 
of  Origen." ' 

In  connexion  with  Schleiermacher  we  should  also  mention  the 
celebrated  Neander,  the  father  of  modern  Church  his- 
tory,  whose  more  profound  religious  experience  and 
more  evangelical  tone  of  expression  went  far  toward  counteracting 
the  progress  of  rationalism.  When  the  Prussian  government  pro- 
posed to  forbid  the  introduction  of  Strauss'  Life  of  Jesus  into  its 
dominion  Neander  strenuously  opposed  the  measure,  and  urged 
that  works  of  that  kind  must  be  met  and  nulliflcd,  not  by  force, 
but  by  argument.  In  1837  he  published  his  Life  of  Jesus  Christ, 
which  was,  to  a  great  extent,  a  reply  to  the  Tubingen  ])rofessor. 
This  work  has,  from  the  time  of  its  appearance,  held  a  high  jilaco 
in  exegetical  literature.  It  treats  the  alleged  difficulties  of  the 
gospel  narratives  with  a  candour  which  commands  respect  and 
admiration.  Neander's  earlier  work  on  the  Planting  and  Train- 
ing of  the  Christian  Church  is  also  a  valuable  contribution  to 
the  exposition  of  the  New  Testament.  He  also  wrote  practical 
commentaries  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  the  Epistle  of 
James,  and  the  First  Epistle  of  John.  IMost  of  his  works  have  been 
translated  into  English. 

'  Critical  History  of  Free  Thought,  pp.  213,  244. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  719 

In  critical  tact  and  exegetical  ability  "William  M.  L.  De  Wettc 

probably  stands  unsurpassed  by  any  biblical  scholar  of 

;  .  De  Wette. 

modei'n  times.     His   views   and   critical   methods  were 

formed  under  the  influence  of  such  theological  teachers  as  Paul  us, 
Gabler,  and  Griesbach,  and  are  essentially  rationalistic.  He  re- 
jected, however,  the  naturalistic  method  of  explaining  the  biblical 
miracles,  and  anticipated  Strauss  in  many  of  the  prominent  positions 
of  the  mythical  interpretation ;  but  he  sliowed  greater  regard  for  the 
religious  element  of  Scripture,  and  never  indulged  in  light  and  dis- 
respectful insinuations  hostile  to  its  divine  character  and  authority. 
In  his  Introductions  to  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  he  subjected 
the  sacred  books  to  the  keenest  scrutiny,  condensing  a  vast  amount 
of  material  into  small  space,  and  exhibiting  in  the  arrangement  and 
construction  of  his  work  the  hand  of  a  master.  His  commentary  on 
the  Psalms  has  ever  been  esteemed  as  a  model  of  exegetical  taste 
and  judgment,  and  has  been  issued  in  several  editions.  His  new 
translation  of  the  Bible  is  conceded  by  eminent  judges  to  be  one  of 
the  most  finished  and  accurate  versions  which  has  ever  been  made 
in  any  language.  His  crowning  work  was  his  condensed  Exegetical 
Handbook  of  the  New  Testament,  in  which  his  exquisite  taste  and 
remarkable  exegetical  tact  appear  in  highest  perfection.  Despite 
the  rationalism  everywhere  apparent,  one  cannot  but  be  deeply 
impressed  with  the  skill  and  ability  of  the  writer.  "  One  thing,  at 
least,"  says  Stuart,  "  can  be  truly  said  of  De  Wette  as  a  commen- 
tator, especially  as  he  appears  in  his  latest  works  of  interpretation, 
this  is,  that  he  rarely  introduces  anything  but  the  simple  principles 
of  exegesis  and  philology  in  order  to  establish  his  views  of  the 
meaning  of  Scripture.  All  creeds  and  confessions  are  left  out  of 
sight,  and  the  text,  the  context,  and  tenor  of  discourse,  and  peculi- 
arities of  idiom,  and  matters  of  antiquity  that  have  respect  to 
various  objects,  opinions,  and  circumstances,  are  ever  resorted  to  as 
the  only  reliable  guides  on  which  an  interpreter  can  depend.  Im- 
partially, for  the  most  part,  has  he  dealt  with  all  these  exegetical 
subsidiaries.  And  that  he  brings  to  the  decision  of  any  exegetical 
question  a  rare  skill  in  detecting  the  nicer  shades  of  language,  a 
highly  cultivated  festhetical  feeling,  and  great  discrimination  in 
judging  of  the  real  and  logical  course  of  thought,  no  intelligent 
reader  of  him  can  deny  or  even  doubt." ' 

Gottfried  Friedrich  Liicke  was  an  intimate  friend  of  De  Wette, 
and  shared  largely  in  his  theological  opinions.     He  was 
professor  of  theology  at  Bonn,  and  subsequently  at  Got- 
tingen.      Besides  numerous  valuable    articles   in   various    German 

"  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  1848,  pp.  2G1,  265. 


Liiclce. 


■.20  HISTORY    OF 

])'jriodicals  he  wrote  a  treatise  on  New  Testataent  hermeneutics, 
;incl  an  elaborate  series  of  works  on  the  writings  of  John.  He  was 
a  most  learned  and  skilful  exegete,  and  worthy  of  the  love  and 
friendship  of  men  like  Schloiermacher  and  De  Wette. 

Many  other  exegetes,  belonging  essentially  to  the  critical  and 
philological  school  of  De  Wette,  flourished  during  the  first  half  of 
The  Rosenmui-  ^'^1'  coutury.  Among  these  the  two  Rosenmiillers  at- 
lers.  taincd   much   distinction,   although   in  exegetical  skill 

and  critical  acuteness  they  were  much  inferior  to  De  Wette.  John 
G.  Rosenratillcr  was  a  popular  preacher  and  a  theologian  of  inde- 
fatigable literary  activity.  Among  his  numerous  publications  his 
History  of  Biblical  Interpretation  in  the  Christian  Church  (5  vols., 
1795-1814),  and  his  Scholia  on  the  New  Testament,  attained  a  well- 
deserved  celebrity.  The  former  work  brings  the  history  of  inter- 
pretation down  to  the  time  of  the  Reformation  ;  his  Scholia  are 
l)liiIological  and  simple,  but  not  of  a  high  order.  E.  F.  C.  Rosen- 
miillcr,  son  of  the  preceding,  was  distinguished  for  his  attainments 
in  oriental  languages,  and  his  Scholia  on  the  Old  Testament  (23  vols., 
Lpz.,  1788-1835).  His  proficiency  in  Semitic  philology,  extensive 
knowledge  of  the  Orient,  and  general  good  judgment,  combined  to 
make  him  an  expositor  of  no  small  merit.  His  larger  Scholia  make 
too  prolix  a  work  for  the  ordinary  student.  A  large  proportion  of 
it  is  a  compilation  of  the  opinions  of  others,  and  too  often  the  reader 
is  at  a  loss  to  know  what  were  the  views  of  the  author  himself. 
The  compendium  of  this  "work  (6  vols.,  Lpz.,  1828-36),  made  by 
Lcchncr  under  the  supervision  of  the  author,  is  confined  mainly  to 
the  explanation  of  the  Scripture  text,  and  is  more  convenient  and 
useful. 

Less  evangelical  in  spirit,  but  more  exact  in  the  treatment  of 
grammatical  questions,  and  more  independent  in  its  mode  of  hand- 
ling the  Scriptures,  is  Maurer's  Grammatico-critical  Com- 
mentary on  the  Old  Testament  (4  vols.,  Lpz.,  1835-47). 
T])c  work  abounds  throughout  with  references  to  the  Hel)rew  gram- 
mars of  Gesenius  and  Kwald.  The  notes  on  the  Pentateuch  and 
the  historical  books,  however,  are  too  brief  to  be  satisfactory,  and 
the  author  exhibits  no  proper  appreciation  of  the  divine  clement  in 
the  Scriptures.  The  fourth  volume,  embracing  Job,  Ecclesiastes, 
and  Canticles,  were  written  by  Augustus  Heiligstedt. 

A  later  and  more  complete  critical  commentary  on  the  Old  Testa- 

^      ^       ment,  and  more  closely  corresponding  to  De  Wette's 

poticai   Uiind-  Ncw  Testament  Handbook,  is  the  joint  Avork  of  Knobel, 

Thenius,  Bertheau,  Hirzel,   J.  Olshauson,   and   Hitzig, 

entitled  Kurzgefasstes  exejjetisches  Handbuch  zum  alten  Testament 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  721 

(16  vols.,  Lpz.,  1838-61;  several  subsequent  editions).  As  is  always 
apparent  in  such  works,  the  authors  vary  in  merit  and  ability,  but 
they  all  exhibit  thorough  training  in  grammar  and  philology,  and 
discuss  obscure  and  difficult  words  and  texts  with  the  greatest  crit- 
ical acumen.  Besides  his  contributions  to  this  Old  Testament  Hand- 
book, Knobel  wrote  a  commentary  on  Ecclesiastes  (1836),  a  work 
on  Hebrew  Prophecy  (2  vols.,  IPS'/),  and  a  learned  treatise  on  the 
genealogical  tables  of  Genesis  (1850).  Ilitzig  has  also  published  a 
critical  commentary  on  the  Psalms  (revised  ed.,  2  vols.,  1863-65),  and 
a  history  of  Israel  (1869),  both  coldly  and  extremely  rationalistic. 

Leonhard  Bertholdt,  a  prominent  representative  of  the  same  ra- 
tionalistic  school  of  critics,   flourished    during  the  first 
quarter  of  the  century.    His  chief  productions  are  a  com- 
mentary on  Daniel  (2  vols.,  Erlangen,  1806-8),  and  a  Historico-critical 
Introduction  to  the  Canonical  and  Apocryphal  Books  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments.     Caesar  von  Lengerke's  commentaries 
on  Daniel  (Konigsb.,  1835)  and  the  Psalms  (1847)  exhibit    ^°°2:erke. 
the  same  spirit,  but  in  critical  and  philological  matters  are  worthy 
of   commendation.      The    exegetical   writings   of   Kuinoel    (C.   G. 
Kiihnol)  evince  notable  tact  and  ability,  and  consist  of 
new  translations  (with  annotations)  of  Hosea,  the  Messi- 
anic prophecies,  and  the  Psalms,  and  commentaries  on  the  historical 
books  of  the  New  Testament  (many  editions)  and  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  (Lpz.,  1831),    In  expounding  the  miracles  Kuinoel  inclines 
to  the  naturalistic  method  of  Eichhorn  and  Paulus.. 

Among  tlie  great  Hebraists,  whose  labours  gave  a  new  impulse 
to  the  cause  of  Old  Testament  philology,  no  name  stands 

Ggsgdius 

higher  than  that  of  William  Gesenius.  At  the  age  of 
twenty-four  he  became  professor  of  theology  at  Halle,  and  in  the 
same  year  published  the  first  volume  of  his  Hebrew-German  Lexi- 
con of  the  Old  Testament  (1810).  The  second  volume  appeai'ed  in 
1812.  New  and  revised  editions  of  this  work  Avere  issued  in  1823, 
1828,  and  often  subsequently,  and  a  Latin  edition,  almost  a  new 
and  independent  production,  appcai-ed  in  1833.  But  his  greatest 
work  in  this  department  was  his  Thesaurus  philologicus  criticus 
Linguae  Hebraeae  et  Chaldoeae  Veteris  Testamenti,  on  which  he 
was  engaged  at  the  time  of  his  death  (1842),  and  which  was  com- 
pleted by  his  friend  and  colleague,  Roediger.  These  publications, 
along  with  his  Hebrew  Grammar,  which  has  appeared  in  numerous 
editions  and  translations,  opened  a  new  era  in  the  cultivation  t)f 
Old  Testament  literature.  The  Hebrew  Lexicon  was  translated 
into  English  by  Christopher  Leo  (Camb.,  1825),  by  J.  W.  Gibbs 

(Andover,  1824),  and  by  E.  Robinson  (Boston,  1836) ;  and  English 
46 


722  HISTORY  OF 

translations  of  the  Hebrew  Grammar  have  been  made  by  Stuart, 
Conant,  and  Davies.  Besides  several  other  works  on  Hebrew  and 
oriental  literature,  Gesenius  wrote  a  philological,  critical,  and 
historical  commentary  on  Isaiah,  with  an  accompanying  transla- 
tion in  German  (Lpz.,  1821),  This  commentary  is  especially  valu- 
able for  its  able  philological  and  archaeological  discussions.  It 
belongs,  however,  to  the  rationalistic  school  of  exegesis.  In  all  his 
works  Gesenius  exhibits  thorough  and  accurate  scholarsliip,  diligent 
and  painstaking  research,  and  a  discriminating  use  of  the  ample 
materials  at  his  command. 

Scarcely  less  distinguished  as  a  Semitic  and  biblical  scholar  was 

Georg  Heinrieh  August  Ewald.     Born  at  Gottingen  in 
E^vald.  .  . 

1803,  he  was  educated  at  the  gymnasium  and  univer- 
sity of  his  native  town,  and  in  his  twentieth  year,  on  leaving  the 
university,  he  published  his  first  work.  Die  Komposition  der  Gene- 
sis kritische  untersucht,  a  treatise  which  long  held  a  respectable 
place  among  critical  dissertations  on  the  first  book  of  the  Bible. 
His  Arabic  and  Hebrew  grammars,  which  have  been  published  in 
larger  and  smaller  forms,  and  in  many  editions,  gave  a  new  impulse 
to  all  studies  in  that  department  of  oriental  research.  His  transla- 
tion and  exposition  of  the  Poetical  Books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
and  also  of  the  Old  Testament  Prophets,  evinced  a  profour;d  ac- 
quaintance with  the  Hebrevr  language,  great  critical  acumen  and 
power  of  original  investigation,  but  have  never  been  accepted  a;? 
either  safe  in  method  or  sound  in  exegesis.  He  also  wrote  on  the 
Apocalypse  (1828),  the  Synoptic  Gospels  (1850),  the  Epistles  of 
Paul  (1S57),  the  writings  of  John  (18G1),  Hebrews  and  the  General 
Epistles  (1870),  and  a  vast  number  of  important  articles  in  various 
German  periodicals.  His  History  of  the  People  of  Israel  (Ge- 
schichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  7  vols.;  English  translation,  7  vols.)  is  in 
many  respects  his  masterpiece.  For  critical  and  jihilological  dis- 
cussions, original  research,  and  numerous  suggestions  of  unquestion- 
able value,  this  work  must  long  hold  a  high  place  among  the  most 
important  contril)utions  of  this  century  to  the  study  of  the  Old 
Testament.  But  with  all  evangelical  scholars  Ewald's  arbitrary 
methods  of  dislocatinir  and  rearransrinfj  the  sacred  books  will  be  re- 
garded  as  unscientific,  violent,  and  fanciful. 

In  1843  Hermann  Ilnpfeld  succeeded  Gesenius  in  the  University 

of  Halle,  and  became  noted  as  one  of  the  most  learned 

Hebraists  ot  rLurope.  Jlis  most  important  contril)ution 
to  biblical  literature  is  his  translation  and  exposition  of  the  Psalms 
(4  vols.,  Gotha,  1855-G2),  a  work  of  vast  learning,  enriched  witli  a 
masterly  arrangement  and  use  of  exegetical  material  drawn  from 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  723 

ancient  and  modern  commentators  both  Jewish  and  Christian.     In 

many  passages  he  opposes  the  views  of  Hengstenbcrg  and  Ewald. 

Andreas  Hoffmann  also  deserves  mention  in  connexion 

witli  Gesenius,  as  a  Semitic  scholar,  whose  lectures  on 

Hebrew  Antiquities  and  Old  Testament  exegesis  contributed  mucli 

to  the  advancement  of  biblical  science. 

The  German  evangelical  school  of  interpreters  includes  men  of 
different  shades  of  opinion,  from  the  rigidly  orthodox,  TheowTubin- 
like  those  of  the  old  Tubingen  school,  to  divines  of  a  Kensciioui. 
free  critical  spirit,  intent,  like  Neander,  to  know  and  maintain  es- 
sential truth.  G.  C.  Storr,  at  the  beginning  of  the  century,  was 
the  leading  representative  of  what  is  known  as  the  old  Tubingen 
school.  He  aimed  to  check  the  growth  of  rationalism  by  a  purely 
scriptural  teaching,  but  his  method  was  unscientific  in  that  it  failed 
to  give  due  prominence  to  the  organic  unity  of  the  Bible,  and 
rested  too  largely  on  isolated  texts.  He  published,  in  connexion 
with  Flatt,  an  Elementary  Course  of  Biblical  Theology  (English 
translation,  Andover,  1830),  and  was  author  of  a  commentary  on 
the  Hebrews  (Tubingen,  1809).  The  two  brothers,  John  F.  and 
Karl  C.  Flatt,  belong  to  the  same  school,  and  wrote  several  useful 
expository  treatises.  Steudel  and  C.  F.  Schmid,  later  rei^resenta- 
tives  of  this  school,  adopted  somewhat  freer  methods,  and  are  sup- 
posed to  have  been  influenced,  to  some  extent,  by  the  views  of 
Schleiermacher. 

Hengstenbcrg,  professor  of  theology  at  Berlin,  was  recognised 
for  almost  half  a  century  as  one  of  the  stauncbest  de- 

•'  •      1  1        Hengstenberg. 

fenders  of  orthodoxy.  His  principal  exegetical  works 
are  Contributions  to  an  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament  (3  vols., 
Berlin,  1831-39),  in  which  he  ably  defends  the  genuineness  of  the 
Pentateuch,  Christology  of  the  Old  Testament  (an  elaborate  com- 
mentary on  the  Messianic  prophecies),  commentaries  on  the  Psalms, 
Ecclesiastes,  Ezekiel,  the  Gospel  and  Revelation  of  John,  and  dis- 
quisitions on  the  genuineness  of  Daniel  and  Isaiah,  the  history  of 
Balaam,  and  the  Books  of  Job,  Isaiah,  and  Solomon's  Song.  He 
was  a  man  of  decided  ability  and  great  learning,  but  often  need- 
lessly dogmatic  and  supercilious  in  setting  forth  his  views.  Most 
of  his  works  have  been  translated  into  English,  and  are  greatly 
prized  by  evangelical  divines.  Closely  attached  to  Hengstenberg, 
and  of  the  same  exegetical  school,  was  TTilvernick,  whose 

»  '  .  Havermck. 

Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  and  commentaries  on 
Daniel  and  Ezekiel,  occupy  a  high  place  in  biblical  literature. 

Frederick  Bleek  was  a  pupil  of  Schleiermacher,  De  Wette,  and 
Neander,  and  in  1829  became  professor  of  theology  at  the  University 


724  HISTORY    OP 

of  Bonn.     His  elaborate  commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 

(3  vols.,  Berlin,   1828-40)  placed  him  in  the  front  rank 
Bleek  .         .       ^  . 

of  biblical  exegetes,  and  in  his  Contributions  to  the 

Criticism  of  the  Gospels  (1846)  he  showed  himself  a  powerful  oppo- 
nent of  the  Tiibingen  rationalists,  and  ably  defended  the  authen- 
ticity of  the  Gospel  of  John.  Tlis  Introductions  to  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments  were  edited  and  published  after  his  death  by  J.  F. 
Bleek  and  A.  Kamphausen,  and  rank  among  the  most  valuable 
works  of  their  kind.  Other  posthumous  publications  are  his  Com- 
mentary on  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  edited  by  Iloltzman,  and  Lec- 
tures on  Revelation,  edited  by  Hossbach  (18G2).  His  works  on 
Biblical  Introduction,  and  his  Lectui-es  on  the  Apocalypse,  have 
been  translated  into  English. 

Other  distinguished  exegetes  of  this  period  were  Umbreit,  pro- 
umbreit  uii-  f^ssor  at  Heidelberg,  whose  expositions  embrace  the 
niann,  etc.  poetical  and  prophetical  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
and  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans;  Ullmann,  of  the  same  university, 
whose  work  on  the  Sinlessness  of  Jesus  has  become  a  classic  in 
apologetical  literature;  Otto  Von  Gerlach,  whose  commentary  on 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments  is  a  popular  and  practical  exposition 
consisting  of  brief  annotations,  and  admirably  adapted  to  the  use 
of  unlearned  readers;  Usteri,  a  Swiss  divine,  Avhose  works  on  John's 
Gospel  and  Paul's  System  of  Doctrine,  and  commentary  on  Gala- 
tians,  exhibit  great  keenness  of  investigation  combined  with  accu- 
rate scholai'ship ;  Hug,  an  eminent  Roman  Catholic  theologian, 
whose  principal  contribution  to  biblical  literature  is  an  Introduction 
to  the  New  Testament,  a  work  of  learning  and  ability  which  h.ts 
been  translated  into  English  and  French;  Schleusnei',  whose  Lexicon 
of  the  Septuagint  Version  (5  vols..  Lips.,  1821)  remains  without  a 
rival;  Karl  F.  A.  Fritzsche,  whose  commentaries  on  Matthew  and 
Mark,  and  especially  on  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Romans  (3  vols., 
Halle,  1836-43),  are  pre-eminent  for  critical  and  philological  acute- 
ness ;  and  Baumgarten-Crusius,  whose  exegetical  writings  treat 
most  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament, 

Probably  no  German  theologian  of  modern  times  exerted  a  wider 
influence  for  ijood  than  Tholuck,  who  was  theological 

Tholuck.  . 

professor  at  Halle  from  1826  to  the  time  of  his  death 
(1877).  He  was  master  of  many  languages,  and  almost  a  prodigy 
of  learning.  His  exegetical  works  consist  of  a  practical  exposition 
of  the  Psalms,  learned  and  comprehensive  commentaries  on  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  the  Gospel  of  John,  and  the  Epistles  to  the 
Romans  and  the  Hebrews.  They  have  been  translated  into  English 
and  widely  circulated.     His  exegesis  is  marked  by  a  devout  regard 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  725 

for  the  Holy  Scrii3tures,  a  profound  theological  insight,  a  clear  per- 
ception of  the  writer's  scope  and  plan,  and  a  wealth  of  learned  illus- 
tration drawn  from  very  wide  and  varied  fields  of  research.  His 
own  deep  and  beautiful  religious  experience  enabled  him,  like 
Chrysostom,  to  apprehend  as  by  intuition  "  the  mind  of  the  Spirit." 
More  mystical  in  tone,  but  similarly  profound  and  comprehensive 
in  his  treatment  of  Scripture,  was  Rudolf  Stier,  familiar 

1  •         T      •      1  1  •   •  Stier. 

to  all  evangelical  scholars  by  his  admirable  exposition 
of  the  Words  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  This  work  is  a  minute  and  ex- 
haustive commentary  on  :ill  the  sayings  of  Jesus  as  preserved  in 
the  Gospels,  and,  though  notably  diffuse,  is  remarkable  for  its  rich- 
ness of  thought,  manifold  beauties  of  expression,  and  deep  devo- 
tional spirit.  To  this  he  subsequently  added  the  Words  of  the 
Angels.'  He  also  wrote  on  Isaiah,  Proverbs,  the  Epistles  to  the 
Ephesians  and  Hebrews,  and  those  of  James  and  Jude.  In  connex- 
ion with  Theile  he  published  a  very  convenient  and  valuable  Poly- 
glot Bible,  in  w^hich  the  Old  Testament  is  given  in  the  Hebrew, 
Septuagint,  Vulgate,  and  Luther's  German  in  parallel  columns,  and 
the  New  Testament  in  Greek,  wdth  the  Vulgate,  German,  and  Au- 
thorized English  versions. 

Hermann  Olshausen  was  of  much  the  same  spirit  and  method  as 
Stier.  Accepting  the  Bible  as  God's  word,  he  aimed  to 
penetrate  to  the  innermost  sense,  and  gather  up  the  di- 
vine thoughts  of  the  Spirit.  His  mystical  tendency  led  him  at  times 
too  far  from  the  path  of  sound  criticism,  but  his  expositions  as  a 
whole  are  well  worthy  of  the  hearty  reception  and  extensive  use 
they  have  obtained.  His  great  work  is  a  commentary  on  the  New 
Testament,  which  he  did  not  live  to  finish.  The  exposition  of 
Philippians,  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  and  Peter,  James,  and  Jude  was 
subsequently  completed  by  Augustus  Weisinger,  and  that  of  He- 
brews and  the  Epistles  and  Revelation  of  John  by  Ebrard,  who  has 
also  written  an  able  work  on  the  Gospel  History.^ 

M.  Bauragarten  of  the  University  of  Rostock  has  published  a 
very  full  work  on  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  which  real-   Baumgarten 
ly  forms  a  history  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  and  opposes  and  Phiiippi. 
with  vigour  the  rationalistic  theories  of  Baur  and   Zeller  of  the 
Tubingen  school.      It  has  been    translated   into  English   (3  vols., 

'  Stier's  Words  of  the  Lord  .Jesus,  translated  into  English  by  Pope,  has  been  pub- 
lished in  Edinburgh  (8  vols.,  1855-58),  and  a  revised  edition,  including  the  Words 
of  the  Angels,  by  Strong  and  Smith.     New  York,  3  vols.,  1864. 

*  Olshausen's  Commentary  and  Ebrard's  work  on  Hebrews  and  the  Epistles  of  John 
have  been  published  in  Clark's  Foreign  Theol.  Library,  and,  in  a  revised  and  improved 
form,  as  far  as  the  end  of  Hebrews,  by  A.  C.  Kendrick,  6  vols.     New  York,  185(i-58. 


726  HISTORY   OF 

Edinb.,  1854),  and  is  a  fitting  companion  of  Xeander's  Planting 
and  Training  of  the  Cliristian  Church.  F.  A.  Philippi,  of  the  same 
university,  is  the  author  of  a  very  able  critical  and  theolosfical  Com- 
nientary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  which  has  also  been  pub- 
lished in  an  English  translation  in  Clark's  Foreiorn  Theological 
Library. 

The  grammatical  and  philological  exposition  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  greatly  indebted  to  the  labours  of  George  Ben- 

Winer.  .  ^ 

edict  Winer,  wliose  Grammar  of  the  Idioms  of  the  New 
Testament  was  first  published  in  1822,  and  has  passed  through 
many  improved  editions  and  translations  (best  Eng.  ed.,  Andover, 
1874).  It  called  attention  to  the  precision  of  the  language  of  the 
New  Testament  writers,  checked  the  lawless  treatment  of  its  idiom 
and  diction  then  widely  prevalent,  and  inaugurated  a  more  thor- 
ough and  scientific  exegesis  of  the  Christian  Scriptures.  This  work 
has  been  ably  supplemented  but  not  superseded  by  Alexander  Butt- 
mann's  Gramnuir  of  the  New  Testament  Greek,  (Eng.  trans,  by 
Thayer,  Andover,  1873).  Winer  also  published  a  grammar  of 
the  Jjiblical  and  Targumic  Chaldee,  a  Hebrew  and  Chaldee  Lexi- 
con, and  a  condensed  but  comprehensive  Biblical  Dictionary  (Real- 
worterbuch),  all  which  have  received  deserved  commendation. 
The  Critical  and  Exegetical  Commentary  on  the  New  Testament 

by  H.  A.  W.  Meyer  is  an  admirable  complement  of 
H.  A.  W.Meyer.       '...  '  . 

Winer's  New  Testament  Grammar,  and  a  noble  illustra- 
tion of  its  principles.  The  first  part  of  Meyer's  work  appeared  in 
1832,  and  to  the  completion  and  perfection  of  it  he  devoted  his  best 
years  and  ability,  making  additions  and  alterations  up  to  the  time 
of  his  death  (1873).  At  his  invitation  the  commentary  on  Thessa- 
lonians  and  Hebrews  Avas  prepared  by  Lilnemann  (who  also  edited 
the  seventh  edition  of  Winer's  Grammar),  that  on  the  Pastoral  and 
Catholic  Epistles  by  Iluther,  and  that  on  the  Apocalypse  by  Diistor- 
dieck.  Among  all  New  Testament  exegetes  Meyer  stands  unri- 
valled. In  penetration  and  critical  ability,  in  philological  accuracy 
and  rare  exegetical  tact,  he  is  scarcely  inferior  to  De  Wette,  while 
in  fulness  of  treatment  and  repeated  painstaking  revision  Meyer's 
work  has  great  advantage  over  the  more  condensed  manual  of 
De  Wette.  It  is  pre-eminently  critical  and  exegetical,  and  does 
not  aim  at  theological  and  homiletical  disquisition.  P^ach  chapter 
ia  prefaced  by  a  lucid  statement  of  the  evidence  for  and  against  the 
various  readings  of  the  original  text,  and  the  exegesis  which  fol- 
Idws  keeps  closely  to  the  grammatical  and  philological  presentation 
of  the  sacred  writer's  thought.  In  his  theory  of  the  origin  of  the 
written  gospels,  and  on   some   other   points,  Meyer  leans  toward 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  727 

rationalism,  and  in  spiritual  insight  lie  is  inferior  to  Stier;  but  his 
tone  is  always  reverent,  and  he  belongs  essentially  to  the  evangel- 
ical school  of  interpreters.'  An  English  translation  of  his  entire 
New  Testament  commentary  (except  Revelation)  has  been  pub- 
lished by  the  Clarks  of  Edinburgh. 

Among  these  later  biblical  scholars  of  Germany,  Karl  Auberlen  is 
well  known  by  his  able  volume  on  Daniel  and  the  Reve-  Auberlen  and 
lation  (Basel,  1854),  which  has  been  also  published  in  an  Kurtz. 
English  and  a  French  translation.  J.  IT.  Kurtz,  professor  of  theology 
at  Dorpat,  is  author  of  an  exceedingly  valuable  contribution  to  the 
exposition  of  the  Pentateuch  under  the  title  of  History  of  the  Old 
Covenant  (Eng.  trans,  by  Edersheim,  3  vols.,  Phila.,  1859).  A  most 
excellent  and  convenient  series  of  commentaries  on  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  that  prepared  by  Karl  F.  Keil  and  Franz  De-  j^^jj  ^n^  ce- 
litzsch.  The  work  is  eminently  critical  and  exegetical,  utzsch. 
and  deals  fully  and  fairly  with  all  the  great  questions  which  the 
modern  higher  criticisni  has  raised.  The  learned  authors  have  long 
been  known  as  representative  exegctes  of  the  evangelical  school, 
and  have  furnished  numerous  other  contributions  to  biblical  litera- 
ture besides  the  commentaries  belonging  to  this  series.  English 
translations  of  most  of  them  have  been  published  in  Clark's  Foreign 
Theological  Library. 

Another  series  of  commentaries  still  more  comprehensive  in  its 
plan  is  the  immense  Biblework  recently  issued  under  Lange's  BiWe- 
the  editorial  supervision  of  J.  P.  Lange.  It  aims  to  be  ^'^'ork. 
a  complete  critical,  exegetical,  and  homiletical  commentary  on  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments.  Lange  himself  contributed  to  this  great 
work  more  than  any  other  writer.  His  principal  assistants  were 
J.  J.  Van  Oosterzee,  Otto  ZOchler,  C.  B.  Moll,  W.  J.  Schroeder, 
Fay,  Bahr,  Nagelsbach,  Schmoller,  Kleinert,  Lechler,  Kling,  Braune, 
and  Fronmiiller.  The  work  has  been  translated  into  English  by 
Philip  Schaff,  assisted  by  a  large  number  of  American  scholars,  and 
published  in  a  greatly  enlarged  form  in  twenty-five  octavo  volumes, 
including  one  on  the  Apocrypha,  by  E.  C.  Bissel  (New  York,  1864- 
80).     It  is  by  far  the  most  learned  and  comprehensive  commentary 

'  In  the  preface  to  the  fourth  edition  of  his  Commentary  on  Romans  (1865)  Meyer 
wrote :  "  We  older  men  have  seen  the  day  when  Dr.  Paulus  and  his  devices  were  in 
vogue ;  he  died  without  leaving  a  disciple  behind  him.  We  passed  through  the  tem- 
pest raised  by  Strauss  some  thirty  years  ago ;  and  with  what  a  sense  of  solitariness 
might  its  author  now  celebrate  his  jubilee !  We  saw  the  constellation  of  Tiibingen 
arise,  and,  even  before  Baur  departed  hence,  its  lustre  had  waned.  A  fresh  and  firmer 
basis  for  the  truth  which  had  been  assailed,  and  a  more  complete  apprehension  of  the 
truth — these  were  the  blessings  which  the  waves  left  behind ;  and  so  will  it  be  when 
the  present  surge  has  passed  away." 


728  HISTORY   OP 

on  tlie  whole  Bible  which  has  appeared  in  modern  times.  Schaff 
has  also  editorial  supervision  of  a  popular  commentary  on  the  New 
Testament,  by  English  and  American  scholars  of  various  evangelical 
denominations,  several  volumes  of  which  have  already  appeared, 

F,  Godet,  a  French  biblical  scholar  and  professor  of  theology  at 
Godct  and  Neuchutel,  has  published  commentaries  on  the  Gospels 
Lutiiaidt.  of  Luke  and  John  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  which 
have  been  translated  into  English  and  received  everywhere  with 
great  favour.  His  exegesis  is  perspicuous,  fresh,  and  full  of  sug- 
gestion, but  needlessly  diffuse.  The  elaborate  work  of  Luthardt 
on  John's  Gospel  (Eng.  trans,,  3  vols.,  Edinb,)  is  rigidly  orthodox, 
and  treats  the  difficult  questions  connected  with  the  fourth  gospel 
in  great  detail  and  with  ample  learning, 

A  large  number  of  excellent  and  useful  commentaries  by  English 
writers  have  appeared  during  the  present  century.  Next  to  Mat- 
thew Henry's  exposition  no  work  of  similar  scope  and  magnitude 

has  had  a  M'idcr  circulation  or  is  better  known  than  the 
Adam  Clarke.  .  r    k  -t         r^^     ^  -t^   •  i      i  i 

commentary  of  Adam  LlarKc.  It  is  marked  by  a  num- 
ber of  eccentricities  of  opinion,  but  displays  a  vast  amount  of  learn- 
ing, and  is  a  monument  of  the  tireless  industrv  of  its  author.  It  has 
especially  served  a  useful  purpose  among  the  jVIethodist  ministry  and 
people,  by  whom  it  has  been  chiefly  used.  Less  critical  and  learned, 
Benson  and  ^^^  more  practical,  is  the  commentary  of  Joseph  Benson, 
Watson.  Xt  is,  hoAvever,  largely  a  com})ilation  from  Poole's  Anno- 

tations, Richard  Watson's  exposition  of  Matthew,  Mark,  and  other 
portions  of  the  Scriptures  (Lond,,  1833),  evinces  a  talent  for  sim- 
ple, yet  thorough  and  profound,  exegesis  superior  to  that  of  Clarke 
and  Benson,  and  remains  a  noble  fragment  of  his  projected  exposi- 
tion of  the  entire  New  Testament.  Ebenezer  Henderson's  com- 
Henrierson and  mentaries  on  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  the  Minor 
BioomUeia.  Prophcts  have  commanded  the  attention  of  the  learned 
world,  .and  entitle  him  to  a  place  among  the  ablest  biblical  exposi- 
tors. Bloomiield's  Recensio  Synoptica  (8  vols.,  Lond.,  1826-28),  and 
Greek  Testament  with  English  notes  (1829,  and  often),  served  a 
useful  pur])ose  in  their  day,  and  contain  much  judicious  exposition, 
but  they  have  been  superseded  by  later  and  more  accurate  works  of 
the  same  class.  John  Kitto,  one  of  the  most  eminent 
biblical  scholars  of  England,  greatly  promoted  the  in- 
terests of  sacred  learning  by  his  Pictorial  Bible,  histories  of  Pales- 
tine, and  Cyclopedia  of  Biblical  Literature.  The  last-named  work, 
which  has  been  issued  in  a  greatly  enlarged  form  under  the  editor- 
ship of  "W.  L.  Alexander,  gave  a  new  and  mighty  imj)ulse  to  biblical 
studies  in  England  and  America,     It  is  scarcely  too  much  to  say 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  739 

that  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  and  M'Clintock  and  Strong's 
Cyclopjedia  of  Biblical,  Theological,  and  Ecclesiastical  Literature, 
are  the  outgrowth  and  fruitage  of  the  encyclopjedic  labours  in  bib- 
lical science  inaugurated  by  John  Kitto.     Kitto  also  projected  and 
edited  for  many  years  the  Journal  of  Sacred  Literature,  and  wi'ote 
a  very  popular  series  of   expository  dissertations  entitled   Daily 
Bible  Illustrations.     Thomas  Hartwell  Home  is  widely 
and  favouiably  known  by  his  Introduction  to  the  Critical 
Study  and  Knowledge  of  the   Holy  Scriptures,  which  has  passed 
through  numerous  editions,  and  has  been,  in  the  course  of  years, 
greatly  improved  and  enlarged,  especially  by  Ay  re  and  Tregelles. 
It  has  long  commanded  in  English  biblical  literature  the  position 
of  a  standard  work,  and  has  inspired  and  cultivated  in  thousands  a 
taste  for  critical  and  exegetical  studies.     Samuel  David- 
son has  also  added  lustre  to  British  scholarship  by  his 
treatise  on  Sacred  Herraeneutics  and  Biblical  Criticism,  Introduc- 
tions  to   the    Old   and    New   Testaments,   English   ti'anslation   of 
Ftirst's  Hebrew  and  Chaldee  Lexicon,  and  other  valuable  woi'ks. 
His  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament  and  some  of  his  other  writ- 
ings are  notably  rationalistic. 

Among  the  more  recent  English  exegetes  Henry  Alford  holds  a 
conspicuous  place.  His  chief  work  is  a  critical  edition 
of  the  Greek  Testament,  with  a  digest  of  various  read- 
ings, learned  prolegomena,  and  copious  philological  and  exegetical 
notes  (5  vols,,  London,  1851-61).  The  author  was  fluctuating  and 
somewhat  inconsistent  in  several  parts  of  his  exposition,  and  suc- 
cessive editions  show  numerous  changes  of  opinion,  but  his  work  as 
a  whole  has  gathered  up  in  convenient  form  a  large  amount  of 
valuable  material,  and  has  made  judicious  use  of  the  labours  of 
German  critics  as  well  as  those  of  other  exegetes,  both  ancient  and 
modern.  The  work  has  had  an  extensive  circulation,  and  has  met 
a  wide-felt  want.  Webster  and  Wilkinson  have  also  published  an 
edition  of  the  Greek  Testament  with  grammatical  and  exegetical 
notes.  It  is  less  elaborate  and  learned  than  Alford's,  and  is  adapted 
for  learners  rather  than  the  learned. 

The  liberal  views  of  Alford  on  inspiration  and  some  other  to])ics 
probably    had    an    influence    in    leading    Christopher 

£„,*',  ,  .  .     1  1      T  T         Wordswortb. 

Wordsworth  to  prepare  his  more  strictly  orthodox  edi- 
tion of  the  Greek  Testament  with  notes  (4  parts,  London,  1856-61). 
He  has  also  extended  his  exposition  over  the  whole  Bible  (6  vols., 
1864-72).  He  exhibits  a  profound  veneration  for  the  Scriptures  as 
the  Avord  of  God,  and  furnishes  many  excellent  comments.  But 
his  work  as  a  whole  is  disproj)ortionate,  makes  much  use  of  the 


730  HISTORY    OF 

fathers,  is  often  fanciful,  and  avoids  difficulties  on  wliicli  such  a 
work  is  expected  to  throw  light.     Far  more  profound  and  satisfac- 
tory are  the  excgetical  productions  of  Trench,  whose 
Trench.  j  »  i  ' 

Notes  on  the  Miracles  and  Parables  of  our  Lord  are 

models  of  biblical  exposition.  He  has  also  written  a  brief  commen- 
tary on  the  second  chapter  of  Matthew,  a  volume  of  most  valuable 
cxegctical  essays  entitled  Studies  in  the  Gospels,  a  Commentary 
on  the  Epistles  to  the  Seven  Churches  of  Asia,  and  the  best  work 
yet  extant  on  the  Synonymes  of  the  New  Testament.  He  combines 
in  his  expositions  a  discriminating  use  of  the  fatliers,  the  mediteval 
exegetes,  and  later  writers,  with  the  best  results  of  the  most  recent 
criticism,  and  touches  every  point  with  the  hand  of  a  master. 

No  finer  specimens  of  critical  and  grammatical  commentary  ex- 
ist in  the  English  language  than  those  of  Charles  J. 

ElliCOtt.  o  o        r> 

EUicott  on  the  Epistles  of  Paul.  His  exegesis  is  based 
upon  a  critically  revised  text  (substantially  that  of  Tischendorf), 
and  proceeds  with  steady  and  deliberate  care  to  set  forth  the  exact 
meaning  of  the  apostle  according  to  the  most  approved  methods  of 
grammatico-historical  interpretation.  No  difficulty  is  evaded  or 
overlooked;  no  peculiarity  of  language  or  construction  escapes  his 
notice.  "  I  have  in  all  cases  striven,"  he  says,  "  humbly  and  rever- 
ently to  elicit  from  the  words  their  simple  and  primary  meaning. 
AVhere  that  has  seemed  at  variance  with  historical  or  dogmatical 
deductions — where,  in  fact,  exegesis  has  seemed  to  range  itself  on 
one  side,  grammar  on  the  other — I  have  never  failed  candidly  to 
state  it;  where  it  has  confirmed  some  time-honoured  interpretation 
I  have  joyfully  and  emphatically  cast  my  small  mite  into  the  great 
treasury  of  sacred  exegesis,  and  have  felt  gladdened  at  being  able 
to  yield  some  passing  support  to  wiser  and  better  men  than  my- 
self."'  This  eminent  divine  has  written  on  all  the  epistles  of  Paul 
except  Romans  and  Corinthians,  and  is  also  favourably  known  from 
other  publications,  especially  his  Hulsean  Lectures  on  the  Life  of 
Christ. 

Of  very  much  the  same  order  and  style  are  the  recent  commen- 
taries of  J.  B.  Lightfoot  on  the  Epistles  of  Paul.     They 
are  accompanied,  however,  witJi  learned  introductions 
and  elaborate  discussions  of  various  critical  and  historical  questions 
connected   \\\\]i  the  several  epistles.     The  writer  is  a  sound  and 
judicious  expositor,  and  has  announced  his  purpose  to  furnish  a 
complete  edition  of  Paul's  epistles  on  the  same  plan  as 
those  (Galatians,  Philii)pians,  Colossians,  and  Philemon) 
already  published.     Professor  John  Eadie's  commentaries  on  the 

'  Preface  to  Galatians,  first  edition. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  731 

Greek  text  of  Epliesians,  Colossians,  Galatians,  and  Thessaloiiians 
are  more  detailed  in  their  expositions,  and  abound  in  theological 
and  practical  disquisition.  The  writer,  however,  draws  from  many 
sources  an  interesting  and  useful  mass  of  illustration.  The  fathers, 
the  schoolmen,  the  reformers,  the  poets,  the  French  and  German 
writers,  and  the  English  and  Scotch  theologians  are  made  to  con- 
tribute to  the  explanation  and  illustration  of  the  apostle's  thoughts. 
Paton  J.  Gloag  has  written  a  critical  and  exegetical 
commentary  on  the  Acts  of  the  Aj^ostles  (Edinb.,  1870), 
in  which  the  critical  and  philological  element  is  less  prominent 
than  the  purely  exegetical.  The  notes  are  based  on  a  new  transla- 
tion made  from  the  seventh  edition  of  Tischendorf's  Greek  text, 
and  aim  to  bring  out  fully  and  clearly  the  meaning  of  the  sacred 
writer.  The  work  is  worthy  of  a  place  by  the  side  of  those  of 
Lightfoot  and  Eadie. 

The  commentaries  of  J.  G.  Murphy  on  Genesis,  Exodus,  Levit- 
icus, and  the  Psalms  have  elicited  universal  commenda- 

mi  1  T      1  c  1  •  1  Murphy. 

tion.      1  hey  make  no  great  display  oi  learnmg,  but  are 
lucid,  discriminating,  and  comprehensive,  yet  sufficiently  concise, 
and  adapted  to  the  wants  of  unlearned  readers.     James  Morison's 
Critical  Exposition  of  the  Third  Chapter  of  Romans, 

T,-  •  HT1  TTiTi  Morison. 

and  his  commentaries  on  Matthew  and  Mark,  are  com- 
prehensive and  elaborate,  but  often  infelicitous  in  style,  and,  per- 
haps, needlessly  diffuse.     Perowne's  work  on  the  Psalms  (2  vols., 
Lond.,    1864-68)    consists   of  a   new   translation,   with 
introductions  and  notes,  and  exhibits  numerous  excellen- 
ces.    It  would  be  difficult  to  name  another  exposition  of  the  Psalter 
which  surpasses  this  one  in  its  combination  of  good  sense,  scholarly 
finish,  sound  exegesis,  and  the  admirable  arrangement  and  distribu- 
tion of  its  several  parts. 

Jamieson,  Fausset,  and  Brown  are  the  authors  of  a  critical,  ex- 
perimental, and  practical  commentary,  on  the  whole  jamieson,  Faus- 
Bible.  The  notes  are  brief,  but  characterized  by  good  ^^^'  ^^'^  Brown, 
sense,  and  well  adapted  to  the  wants  of  that  numerous  class  who 
desire  the  results  of  the  best  criticism  and  exegesis  presented  to 
them  in  a  clear  and  concise  form.  Much  more  comprehensive  and 
complete  is  the  recent  commentary  suggested  and  planned  by 
Denison,  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  prepared  by 
eminent  clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England  under  the  edito- 
rial supervision  of  F.  C.  Cook,  canon  of  Exeter.  It  is  speaker'scom- 
known  in  England  as  the  Speaker's  Commentary,  and  memary. 
has  been  republished  in  this  country  under  the  title  of  The  I>il)le 
Commentaiy.     The   introductions   to  the   several  books,   and  the 


732  HISTORY   OF 

special  essays  on  important  subjects  of  biblical  science,  are  of  the 
highest  value,  while  the  commentary  and  critical  notes  are  usually 
learned  and  judicious.  As  in  all  productions  of  this  class,  we  notice 
tlie  inequality  of  the  different  writers,  but  the  work,  as  a  Avhole,  is 
abundantly  worthy  of  the  place  it  was  designed  to  fill,  and  as  a 
learned  and  recent  English  commentary  on  the  whole  Bible  it  has 
no  equal. 

Other  English  exegetes,  in  learning  and  ability  equal  to  the  best, 
other  English  ^^'^  ^^-  P'  Stanley,  whose  Lectures  on  the  History  of 
exegetes.  ^.he  Jewish  Church,  and    commentary  on  Corinthians, 

combine  ample  and  accurate  learning  with  great  vividness  and 
beauty  of  statement;  Benjamin  Jowett,  wdiose  critical  notes  and 
dissertations  on  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  Galatians,  and 
Romans,  though  rationalistic,  are  pre-eminently  scholarly  and  sug- 
gestive; Conybeare  and  Howson,  whose  great  work  on  the  Life 
and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  furnishes  the  most  graphic  portraiture  of 
the  history  and  writings  of  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  which  has 
ever  appeared  in  any  language;  Thomas  Lewin,  whose  magnificent 
volumes,  covering  the  same  field  as  that  of  the  work  last  named,  is 
worthy  to  stand  by  its  side,  and,  in  not  a  few  matters,  is  its  superior. 
E.  B.  Elliott's  ponderous  work  on  the  Apocalypse  (4  vols.,  fifth  edi- 
tion, London,  18G2)  shows  great  industry  and  research,  and  contains 
a  vast  amount  of  valuable  material,  but  his  system  of  interpretation 
is  not  likely  to  command  confidence.  Kalisch,  a  learned  Jew,  has 
written  an  English  translation  and  critical  exposition  of  Genesis, 
Exodus,  and  Leviticus,  His  volumes  are  a  storehouse  of  learning, 
and  are  very  helpful  to  a  thorough  study  of  the  Pentateuch,  but 
they  are  leavened  with  rationalism.  His  theological  notions  gener- 
ally are  much  less  satisfactory  than  his  historical  and  critical  com- 
ments. Ginsburg's  commentaries  on  Koheleth  (Ecclesiastes)  and 
the  Song  of  Songs  are  also  very  full  of  the  products  of  critical, 
exegetical,  and  historical  research,  and  well  deserving  of  the  careful 
study  of  all  biblical  scholars. 

It  must  be  confessed  that  American  scholars  have  as  yet  pro- 
American  exe-  tluced  comparatively  little  that  will  endure  favourable 
getes.  comparison  with  the  great  exegetical  works  of  British 

and  German  authors.  The  copious  work  of  Lange  (see  p.  727),  which 
has  been  reproduced  in  a  greatly  improved  form  in  this  country, 
has  served  to  demonstrate  the  ample  critical  and  exegetical  ability 
of  American  sc^iolarship  to  rival  that  of  the  Old  World.  Neverthe- 
less that  Avork  is  essentially  German.  There  are  two  American 
names  which  stand  ))re-eiiiincnt  in  biblical  literature,  and  liave  com- 
manded attention  both  in  England  and  Germany.     Moses  Stuart 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  733 

and  Edward  Robinson  did  more  than  any  other  two  men  to  initiate 
an  interest  in  critical  studies  and  to  promote  the  cultivation  of 
biblical  science  in  their  own  country.  Stuart  was  made 
professor  of  sacred  literature  at  Andover  m  1810,  and 
continued  in  that  position  until  1848.  During  these  years  he  pub- 
lished a  grammar  of  the  Hebrew  language,  based  on  that  of  Gese- 
nius,  a  Hebrew  Christomathy,  a  New  Testament  grammar,  a  Critical 
History  and  Defence  of  the  Old  Testament  Canon,  and  commen- 
taries on  Hebrews,  Romans,  and  the  Apocalypse.  He  afterward 
published  commentaries  on  Daniel,  Ecclesiastes,  and  Proverbs.  In 
all  these  works  he  shows  the  skill  of  a  master,  and  his  commentaries 
have  maintained,  up  to  the  present  time,  a  j)lace  among  the  ablest 
expositions  of  the  books  which  they  treat. 

Robinson's  contributions  to  biblical  literature  were  more  pro- 
found and  massive  than  those  of  Stuart.  In  1825  he  Edward  Robin- 
published  a  translation  of  Wahl's  Clavis  Philologica  son. 
of  the  New  Testament,  which  was  at  a  later  period  of  his  life  en- 
tirely superseded  by  his  own  Greek  and  English  Lexicon  of  the 
New  Testament  (new  and  revised  ed.,  New  York,  1850),  a  work 
that  has  had  incalculable  influence  in  directing  the  studies  of  theo- 
logical students  and  ministers.  In  1831  he  founded  the  Biblical 
Repository,  Avhich  subsequently  became  united  with  the  Bibliotheca 
Sacra,  and  received  some  of  the  best  exegetical  productions  both  of 
himself  and  Professor  Stuart.  His  ti'anslation  of  Gesenius'  Hebrew 
and  Chaldee  Lexicon  did  for  promoting  the  study  of  Hebrew  what 
his  New  Testament  Lexicon  has  done  for  the  studj  of  the  Greek 
Testament.  His  biblical  researches  in  Palestine  still  remain, 
after  the  lapse  of  more  than  forty  years,  an  indispensable  authority 
on  matters  of  biblical  geography.  His  translation  of  Buttmann's 
Greek  Grammar,  and  his  Greek  and  English  Harmonies  of  the 
Gospels,  are  of  less  note,  but  very  useful  in  their  way.  He  ranks 
among  the  most  distinguished  biblical  scholai's  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  and  his  name  is  as  well  kno\\Ti  in  England  and  Germany 
as  in  his  OAvn  land. 

Joseph  Addison  Alexander  acquired  a  reputation  in  Europe  as 
well  as  in  America  by  his  learned  and  useful  commen- 
taries on  Isaiah,  the  Psalms,  the  Acts,  and  the  Gospels 
of  Matthew  and  Mark.  For  fulness  of  treatment,  and  as  a  thesaurus 
of  the  views  of  the  most  important  expositors,  his  work  on  Isaiah  is 
unsurpassed.  His  scholarship  was  broad,  accurate,  and  profound, 
and  his  exegetical  talent  commanded  the  attention  of  all  the  great 
biblical  scholars  of  his  time. 

Among    the    other    more    noted.  American    exes^etes    we    name 


734  HISTORY  OF 

Andrews  Norton,  a  Unitarian  scholar,  and  author  of  a  learned  and 
other  American  valuable  work  on  the  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels 
expositors.  (2d  ed.,  3  vols.,   1846);    Charles  Hodge,   whose   com- 

mentary on  Romans  (new  ed.,  1864),  notably  Calvinistic  in  its  the- 
ology, ranks  among  the  ablest  expositions  of  that  important  epistle; 
he  has  also  written  on  the  two  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  and  on 
Ephesians ;  S.  H.  Turner,  who  is  widely  and  favourably  known  by 
his  commentaries  on  Romans,  Hebrews,  and  Ephesians,  a  critical 
work  on  Genesis,  a  volume  on  the  interpretation  of  Prophecy,  and 
translations  of  various  German  exegetical  works;  and  George  Bush, 
whose  Notes  on  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Joshua,  and 
Judges  are  judicious  and  pi-actical,  have  served  a  very  useful  pur- 
pose, and  have  had  a  wide  circulation.  Albert  Barnes  has  Avritten 
expository  notes  on  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  and 
also  on  Job,  Isaiah,  Daniel,  and  the  Psalms,  They  have  been  emi- 
nently popular,  and  have  served  to  meet  the  great  demand  for  a 
clear,  full,  and  simple  exposition,  based  upon  the  common  English 
version,  and  adapted  to  the  wants  of  Sunday-school  teachers  and 
ordinary  readers.  Melanchthon  W.  Jacobus  is  the  author  of  excel- 
lent commentaries  on  the  Gospels,  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and 
the  Book  of  Genesis.  John  J.  Owen's  Critical,  Expository,  and 
Practical  Commentary  on  Matthew,  Mark,  and  the  Acts  is  a  lucid, 
thorough,  evangelical  exposition,  and  deservedly  ranks  among  the 
very  best  popular  commentaries  which  our  country  has  produced. 
Whedon's  Commentriry  on  the  New  Testament  (5  vols.  12mo, 
1860-80),  intended  for  popular  use,  is  more  original  and  indepen- 
dent in  its  i^lan,  and  more  complete  for  its  purpose  than  any  of  the 
manual  expositions  just  mentioned.  Its  style  is  incisive,  epigram- 
matic, and  brilliant;  its  tone,  profoundly  evangelical.  It  deals  in  a 
manly  way  with  all  difficulties,  and  sets  numerous  important  pas- 
sages in  a  light  and  beauty  not  recognised  before  by  any  exegete. 
It  is  judiciously  confined  to  exposition  proper,  usually  seizes  the 
central  thought  of  the  sacred  writer,  and  exhibits  it  concisely  and 
impressively.  A  series  of  commentaries  on  the  Old  Testament, 
prepared  by  different  authors  and  executed  on  the  same  plan  as 
that  of  Whedon's'  New  Testament,  is  in  preparation,  and  several 
volumes  (covering  Joshua  to  Jeremiah)  have  already  been  pub- 
lished. Henry  Cowles  has  completed  a  series  of  expository  notes 
on  the  wiiole  Bible,  designed  for  pastors  and  peo])le  (16  vols. 
12nu)),  which,  without  any  parade  of  learning,  are  distinguished  by 
good  sense  and  brevity,  clearness  of  statement,  sound  and  discrim- 
inating judgment,  and  able  treatment  of  the  obscure  and  difficult, 
Varts  of  Scripture,  on  which  the  ordinary  reader  needs  information. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  735 

Hackett's  commentary  on  the  original  text  of  the  Acts  (Boston, 
1858),  and  Conant's  work  on  Genesis,  Job,  Proverbs,  and  other 
books,  in  connexion  with  the  new  translations  of  the  American 
Bible  Union,  are  more  learned  and  philological  than  the  popular 
commentaries  named  above.  For  critical  purposes  they  are  of  a 
high  order,  and  worthy  of  the  many  commendations  which  they 
have  received.  The  Greek  and  English  Harmonies  of  the  Gospels 
by  James  Strong  and  Frederic  Gardiner  are  the  best  works  of  the 
kind  extant,  and  exhibit  accurate  scholarship,  excellent  judgment, 
and  the  most  painstaking  fidelity  anji  care.  Nast's  English  com- 
mentary on  Matthew  and  Mark,  modelled  much  after  the  style  of 
Lanixe's  work  on  the  same  books,  with  an  elaborate  Introduction  to 
the  Gospel  Records  (Cincinnati,  1864,  8vo),  is  an  exceedingly  valu- 
able contribution  to  biblical  literature.  The  introduction  has  been 
published  separately.  W.  G.  T.  Shedd  has  recently  j)ublished  a 
Critical  and  Doctrinal  Commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
which  is  based  upon  the  Greek  text  of  Lachmann,  and  is  truly  an 
elaborate  exegetical  and  theological  discussion  of  the  great  ques- 
tions which  centre  in  this  book.  Its  doctrinal  position  is  that  of 
the  Calvinistic  confessions,  and  it  is  a  worthy  compeer  and  comple- 
ment of  Hodge's,  commentary  on  the  same  epistle. 

The  textual  criticism  of  the  New  Testament  has  been  carried  dur- 
ing the  present  century  to  a  high  degree  of  perfection.  NewTest.Text- 
In  1813  G.  C.  Knapp,  author  of  a  translation  and  ex-  uai  criticism, 
position  of  the  Psalms,  lectures  on  Christian  Theology  and  other 
works,  published  a  second  edition  of  his  Greek  Testament  (Halle, 
2  vols.  8vo),  in  which  he  availed  himself  of  Griesbach's  labours, 
and  fui-nished  a  work  so  useful  that  it  rapidly  passed  Knapp,  scimiz, 
through  numerous  reprints  and  editions,  and  met  with  andSchoiz. 
general  approbation.  I?i  1827  David  Schulz  supervised  a  new  edi- 
tion of  Griesbach's  Greek  text  of  the  Four  Gospels,  which  he  en- 
riched Avith  numerous  additions.  J.  M.  A.  Scholz  spent  twelve 
years  of  diligent  research  in  the  libraries  of  Europe  and  in  several 
monasteries  of  the  East  collecting  and  collating  manuscripts  and 
other  material  for  a  new  critical  Greek  Testament,  which  appeared 
at  Leipsic  in  two  quarto  volumes  (1830-36),  and  served  a  useful 
purpose  chiefly  because  of  the  large  amount  of  critical  materials 
which  it  supplied.     Lachmann's  Critical  New  Testament 

,,  ,  Til  11  Lachmann. 

(2  vols.,  1842-50)  was  executed  on  the  plan  proposed  long 
before  by  Bentley   (see  above,   p.   699),   and  ignoring  the   textus 
receptus,  which  had  too  greatly  fettered  sound   and  independent 
criticism,  he  aimed,  by  the  exclusive  use  of  the  oldest  authorities, 
to  reconstruct  the  text  which  was  current  in  the  fourth  century. 


T-.JO  HISTORY  OF 

The  number  of  his  authorities  was  limited,  and  his  work  was  at 
first  subjected  to  very  hostile  criticism,  largely  because  of  a  mis- 
understanding of  his  plan  and  purpose;  but  later  critics  have  almost 
universally  acknowledged  the  correctness  of  his  principles  and  the 
great  value  of  his  services. 

No  textual  critic  of  the  century  has  contributed  to  this  depart- 
ment of  biblical  science  as  much  as  Tischendorf.     He 
Tischendorf.  ^    ,,         •   -^    i  ^i      ,m         •  ,.  x-i  i     i 

rei^eatedly  visited  the  libraries  or  iLurope  and  the  mon- 
asteries of  the  East,  made  valuable  discoveries  of  ancient  critical 
authorities,  edited  many  of  the  most  important  manuscripts,  and 
pul)lishQd  in  all  twenty-four  editions  of  the  Greek  Testament,  four 
of  which  (editions  of  1841,  1849,  1859,  and  1872)  mark  a  definite 
]M-ogress  in  the  acquisition  of  critical  materials.  His  method  is  es- 
sentially that  of  Lachmann,  but  makes  use  of  all  authorities  which 
may  reasonably  be  expected  to  aid  in  ascertaining  the  most  ancient 

text.     S.  P.  Tregelles,  an  English  scholar  who  has  pub- 
Tregelles.  .  o  >  ts  ...  ... 

lished  several  very  useful  works  in  biblical  criticism 

and  exegesis,  is  probably  best  known  by  his  Greek  Testament  edited 

from  ancient  authorities,  with  the  Latin  version  of  Jerome  (1S57- 

79).     He  follows  out  the  principles  of  Lachmann  more  rigidly  than 

Tischendorf,  and  evinces  a  superior  judgment  and  caution;  but  his 

resources  were  more  limited,  and  his  practice  in  the  collation  and 

transcription  of  manuscripts  much  less,  than  that  of  his  German 

contemporary.' 

The  vast  accumulation  of  documentary  evidence  made  accessible 
v.estcott  and  ^^y  the  manifold  labours  of  preceding  generations  en- 
^^'^'''-  abled  B.  F.  Westcott  and  J.  A.  Hort,  two  eminent  En- 

glish critics,  to  issue  in  1881,  after  more  than  twenty-five  years  of 
conscientious  toil,  an  admirable  edition  of  the  Greek  Testament, 
the  text  of  Avhich  is  based  exclusively  on  ancient  authorities.  It  is 
considered  the  maturest  product  of  New  Testament  criticism,  and 
creates  a  conviction  among  scholars  best  competent  to  judge  that 
we  are  in  possession  of  an  approximately  pure  text  of  the  Christian 
Scriptures.  A  comparison  of  the  readings  in  which  Tischendorf, 
Tregelles,  and  Westcott  and  Hort  vary  will  best  serve  to  show  the 
tlegree  of  perfection  which  the  science  of  textual  criticism  has  at- 
tained. The  passages  in  which  there  appears  any  important  varia- 
tion are  scai'cely  a  thousandth  part  of  the  entire  text  of  the  New 
Testament. 

The  revised  English  version  of  the  Scriptures,  prepared  by  the 
leading  biblical    scholars    of    Great    Britain    and    America,    is   a 

'  For  a  complete  list  of  the  printed  editions  of  the  Greek  Testament,  see  Reuss, 
IJibliotheca  Xovi  Tcstiracuti  Grreci.     Brunswick,  1872. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  737 

monuTnental  witness  of  the  advanced  state  of  sacred  criticism  and 

interpretation  at  the  present  time.     The  New  Testament  portion, 

issued  in  1881,  was  received  with  an  eaoferness  and  re-   ,„ 

'  °    ,  .        The  revised 

printed  and  sold  to  an  extent  unparalleled  in  all  the  his-  English  ver- 
tory  of  letters.  Whatever  opinions  are  held  as  to  the  '^'°°' 
rendering  of  jjarticular  texts,  or  the  infelicities  of  occasional  passages, 
competent  judges  concede  that,  as  a  whole,  it  worthily  exhibits  the 
ripest  biblical  scholarship  of  the  nineteenth  century.  The  accuracy 
and  thoroughness  of  that  scholarship  may  be  further  apprehended  by 
observing  that  many  of  the  least  known  and  read  of  modern  exe- 
getes  are  far  supeiior  in  exact  learning  and  herraen&utical  method 
to  any  of  the  fathers  or  the  mediaeval  writers.  We  have  made 
no  special  mention  of  the  works  of  Billroth,  and  Hendewerk,  and 
Hahn,  and  Titmann,  and  Reuss,  of  Reiche,  and  Kullner,   ^    ,.,. 

'  '  ...  eoiidition      of 

and  Riickert,  and  Harless,  of  Bisping,  and  Reitmayr,  modem  exoga- 
and  Windischmann,  and  Beet,  and  scoi'es  besides,  whose  ''^^' 
varied  contributions  to  biblical  exegesis  fully  rank  with  many  of 
those  described  in  the  foregoing  pages.  The  historical  importance 
of  Philo,  and  Origen,  and  Chrysostom,  and  Jerome,  and  Lyra,  makes 
them  much  more  conspicuous  than  these  later  Avriters,  but  the  in- 
trinsic value  of  the  expositions  of  Scripture  produced  by  the  mod- 
erns is  immeasurably  superior  to  those  of  the  ancients.  Neology 
and  rationalism  have  indirectly  done  great  service  for  the  cause  of 
biblical  science.  The  researches  and  suggestions  of  Semler  and 
Gesenius,  the  critical  acuteness  of  De  Wette  and  Ewald,  and  even 
the  v/orks  of  Strauss,  and  Baur,  and  Hilgenfeld,  have  given  an  im- 
pulse to  the  scientific  study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  which  has  al- 
ready produced  inestimable  gain,  and  which  promises  even  better 
for  the  future. 

The  present  condition  of  biblical  interpretation  is,  therefoi'e, 
very  encouraging.  The  results  of  modern  travel  and  present  outlook 
exploration  have  silenced  not  a  few  of  the  cavils  of  ^^^  demand, 
infidelity,  and  placed  the  historical  accuracy  and  trustworthiness 
of  the  sacred  writers  beyond  reasonable  doubt.  The  most  accom- 
plished scholars  of  the  world  are  finding  in  the  study  and  elucida- 
tion of  the  Scrii)tures  a  worthy  and  ennobling  field  of  labour,  and 
are  devoting  their  lives  to  it  with  enthusiastic  delight.  While  hero 
and  there  we  meet  with  some  who  cling  tenaciously  to  traditional 
opinions  and  allegorical  methods,  or  indulge  in  extravagant  notions 
touching  the  character  of  the  inspired  books,  the  great  body  of 
evangelical  expositors  are  united  on  the  fundamental  principles  of 
interpretation.  They  agree,  moreovei",  that  a  proper  commentary 
on  the  Bible,  or  on  any  part  of  it,  should  clearly  set  forth  the  true 
47 


738  HISTORY. 

meaning  of  the  words  and  the  train  of  thought  intended  hy  the 
eacred  writer;  it  should  point  out  the  grammatico-lnstorical  sense 
of  every  passage,  giving  careful  attention  to  the  context,  scope, 
and  plan.  Where  searching  criticism  and  minute  analysis  are  re- 
quired we  are  not  to  be  put  off  with  dogmatic  assertion,  nor  should 
there  be  any  evasion  of  difficulties,  whether  they  be  textual,  geo- 
graphical, chronological,  historical,  or  doctrinal.  A  commentary 
notably  full  on  easy  passages,  and  meagre  or  superficial  on  difficult 
ones,  meets  with  no  favour,  and  such  diffuse  and  ponderous  works 
as  Caryl  on  the  Book  of  Job,  and  Venema  on  the  Psalms,  ai*e 
intolerable  to  the  modern  student.  No  single  commentary  is 
now  expected  to  meet  the  wants  of  all  classes  of  readers.  Philo- 
logical and  grammatical  treatises  are  demanded  by  critical  scholars; 
professional  divines  require  elaborate  disquisitions  on  important 
texts,  and  the  great  body  of  ordinary  readers  need  practical  and 
suggestive  expositions.  Especially  popular  and  widely  used  are 
those  commentaries  which,  without  being  pedantic  or  obscure,  are 
both  critical  and  thorough,  and  furnish  the  common  reader  with  a 
concise  and  clear  statement  of  all  difficulties  involved  in  disputed 
passages,  and  the  best  methods  of  explaining  them.  What  has 
been  written  by  way  of  comment  on  the  Holy  Scriptures  seems 
truly  prodigious,  and  no  lifetime  is  long  enough  to  make  a  thor- 
ough use  of  half  of  it;  and  yet  more  is  needed,  and  new  and  supe- 
rior works  of  biblical  exposition  will  be  demanded  and  supplied  as 
one  generation  succeeds  another. 


BIBLIOGEAPHY    OF   HEEMEIsTEUTICS. 


AcosTA,  Joseph. — De  vera  scriptnras  interpretandi  ratione  libri  tres. 

A  part  of  his  work  entitled  De  Christo  revclato  (Rome,  1590,  4to),  and  published 
ulso  in  the  appendix  of  Menochius'  Commentary  on  the  Bible.  Paris,  1*719, 
and  Venice,  1771. 

Aiken,  C.  A. — The  Citations  of  tlie  Old  Testament  in  the  New.  Trans- 
lated from  the  German  of  Tholuck,  in  Bibliotiieca  Sacra  for  July,  1854. 

Alber,  J.  N. — Institntiones  Hermeneiiticae  Scripturae  Novi  Testamenti. 
Pestini,  1818.     3  vols.  8vo. 

Institntiones  Hermeneuticae  Scripturae  Sacrae  Veteris  Testamenti. 

Pestini,  1827.     3  vols.  8vo. 

Alexander,  Archibald.  — Principle  of  Design  in  the  Interpretation  of 
Scripture.     Bihlical  Rejiertory  and  Princeton  Review  for  July,  1845. 
On  Schools  and  Systems  of  Interpretation,  see  same  Review  for  April,  1855. 

Angus,  Joseph. — The  Bible  Handbook.     An  Introduction  to  the  Study  of 
Sacred  Scripture.     Many  English  and  American  editions.     Revised  with 
Kotes  and  Index  of  Scripture  texts  by  F.  S.  Hoyt.     Pliila.,  1868.     8vo. 
Chapters  iv-vii  of  Part  First  relate  to  Biblical  Hermeneutics. 

Apthor'p,  East. — Discourses  on  Prophecy.     London,  1786.     2  vols.  8vo. 
The  second  discourse  (vol.  i,  pp.  49-106)  discusses  the  Canons  of  Prophecy. 

Arigler,  Alt.man. — Hermeneutica  Biblica  gcneralis  usibus  academicis  ac- 
commodata.     Vienna,  1813.     8vo.     See  Unterkircher. 

Arizzarra,  F.  Hyacintiie. — Elemcnta  Sncr.-ie  Hermeneuticae,  seu  Institu- 
tiones  ad  Intelligentiam  Sacrarum  Scripturanim.  Castrinovi  Carfagnanse, 
1790.    4to. 

Arnold,  Thomas. — Sermons  chiefly  on  tlie  Interpretation  of  Scripture. 
New  edition.     London,  1878.    8vo. 

The  last  two  sermons  of  the  volume  are  on  the  Interpretation  of  Prophecy,  and 
are  accompanied  with  Notes  and  Appendices. 

Ast,  F. — Grundlinien  der  Grammatik,  Hermeneutik  und  Kritik.  Lands- 
hut,  1808.     8vo. 

Ayre,  John.     See  Horne. 

Barrows,  E.  P. — A  new  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Bible.  Pub- 
lished by  Religious  Tract  Society.     Lomlon.     8vo. 

Part  Fourth  of  this  work  is  devoted  to  the  Princi]iles  of  Biblical  Interpretation, 
and  contains  in  clear  outline  and  compact  form  an  excellent  presentation  of 
the  fundamental  principles  of  Hermeneutics. 


740  BIBLIOGRAPHY   OF   HERMENEUTICS. 

Bauer,  G.  L. — Hermeneutica  Sacra  Veteris  Tcstamenti.     Lips.,  1737.   8vo. 
Published  as  a  new  edition  of  Glassius'  Philologia  Sacra,  but  in  fact  a  new  work 
of  no  great  value. 

Entwuif   ciuer   Hermencutik   des    alteti   und  neuen    Testaments. 

Lpz.,  1799.     8vo. 

Rationalistic,  but  full  of  useful  hints. 
Baumgarten,   S.  J. — Unterricht  von  Auslegung  der  hoiligen  Schrift,  fiir 
seine  Zulioreransgefertiget.    Halle,  1742.    8vo,    Published  in  an  enlarged 
form  with  the  title,  Ausfiilirlicher  Vortrag  der  biblischeu  llermeneutik, 
by  J.  C.  Bertram.     Halle,  1769.    4to. 
A  work  of  considerable  value. 
Beck,    C.   D. — Commentationes  de   interpretatione  Vcterum  Scriptoruin. 
Lips.,  1791.     4to. 

Monogrammata    Hermeneutices    librorum    Novi    Foederis.      Pars 

prima,  Hermeneutice  Novi  Testament!  universa.     Lips.,  1803.     8v<). 

Beck,    J.   T. — Versuch  einer  pneumatisch-hermeneutische'i  Entwickelung 
des  neuen  Kapitels  im  Briefe  an  die  Homer.     Stuttgart,  1833.    8vo. 
Somewhat  mystical,  but  suggestive. 

Zur  theolDgischen  Auslegung  der  Sclirift.     Appended  to  liis  Ein- 

leitung  in  das  System  der  christliclien  Lchre.     Stuttgart,  1838.   8vo. 

Beckhaus,  J.  H. — Remarks  on  the  Interpretation  of  the  Tropical  Language 
of  the  New  Testament  (vol.  ii,  Edinl)urgh  Biljlical  Cabinet).  Edin- 
burgh, 1833.     l6mo. 

Bellarmine,  Robert.  —  De  Verbi  Doi  Interpretatione.  Opera,  vol.  i, 
book  iii,  pp.  109-198.     Ingolstadt,  1590.     Folio. 

Blunt,  J.  H. — Key  to  the  Knowledge  and  Use  of  the  Holy  Bible.     Lond., 

1873.  8vo.     Phila.,  1873.     IGnio. 

BosANQ.UET,  S.  R. — Interpretation;  being  Rules  and  Principles  assisting  to 
the   Reading   and   Understanding   of    the    Holy    Scriptures.       London, 

1874.  12mo, 

Bretschneider,  C.  G. — Die  historische-dogmatische  Auslegung  des  neuen 
Testaments,  nach  ihren  Principien,  Quellen,  und  Hiilfsmittelu  darges- 
tellt.     Lpz.,  1806.     13mo. 

Rationalistic,  and  of  no  great  value. 

Brooks,  J.  W. — Elements  of  Prophetical  Interpretation.  Phila.,  1841. 
12mo. 

Budd^us,  J.  F. — Tsagoge  Historico-Tlieologica  ad  Theologiara  Universain 

singnlasqiie  ejus  Partes.     Lips.,   1727.    4to. 
Pages  1427-1796  are  devoted  to  Exegetical  Theology. 

Campbell,  George. — Preliminary  Dissertations  to  the  Gospels.     London, 
1789.     4lo.     New  edition  in  2  vols.     London,  1834.     8vo. 
The  first  volume  contains  twelve  dissertations  in  which  important  questions  of 
New  Testament  exposition  are  ably  handled. 
Carpenter,  William. — Popular  Lectures  on  Biblical  Criticism  and  Inter- 
Ijrctation.     LoikUui,  1829.     8vo, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY   OF   HERMENEUTICS.  741 

Carpenter,  Wii-i.iam. — A  Popular  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures  for  the  Use  of  English  Readers.     London,  1826. 
Fart  First  of  this  work  contains  a  number  of  very  useful  directions  for  reading 
the  Holy  Scriptures. 

Carpzov,  John  B. — Primae  lineae  Hermeneuticae  et  Philologiae  sacrae  cum 
Veteris  turn  Novi  Testament!  brevihus  aphorismis  comprehensae  in  usum 
lectiouum  acadeuiicurum.     Helnistudt,  1790.    8vo. 

Cellerier,  J.  E. — Manuel  D'Hermgneutique  Biblique.    Geneva,  18o2.   8vo. 
An  admirably  planned,  systematic,  and  ably  executed  work ;  one  of  the  best  of 
modern  times. 

Biblical    Hernieneutics.       Chiefly    a   Translation    of    the   Manuel 

D'llernieneutique  Biblique,  par  J.  E.  CellSrier.     By  Charles  Elliott  and 
William  J.  Harsha.     New  York,  1881.     8vo. 

Chamieh,  D. — Panstratiae  Catholicae,  sive  controversiarum  de  religione  ad- 
versus  Pontificios  corpus.     Geneva,  1626.     4  vols,  folio. 
The  first  volume  treats  biblical  interpretation,  but  polemically. 

Chladenius,  IMahtin. — Institutiones  Exegeticae,  regulis  et  observationiljus 
luculentissimis  iustructae,  largissimisque  exemplis  illustratae.  Witten- 
berg, 1725.     8vo. 

Einleitung   zur   rechtigen  Auslegung   von  Redeu   und   Schriften. 

Lpz.,  1742.     8vo. 

Clark,  James  A. — Diversity  of   Interpretation.     Article  in  the  Christian 

Review  of  1857,  pp.  196-215. 
Clausen,  H.  N.  (commonly  Klausen). — Hermeneutik  des  neuen  Testaments; 
aus  dem  Danisclien  iibersetzt  von  C.  O.  Schmidt-Phiseldek.     Lpz.,  1841. 
8vo. 
A  learned  and  valuable  production,  and  especially  useful  for  its  discriminating 
histoi'y  of  biblical  interpretation. 

Clericus,  (Le  Cleuc)  John. — Dissertatio  de  optimo  genere  Interpretuni 
Sacrae  Scripturae. 
Prefixed  to  his  Commentary  on  the  Old  Testament,  vol.  i,  pp.  xiv-xxviii.     Am- 
sterdam, 17 10. 
Cobet,  C.  G. — Oratio  de  arte  interpretandi  grammatices  et  critices  funda- 
mentis  innixa.  primario  pliilolngi  officio.     Leyden,  1847.     8vo. 

CoLLYER,  David. — Tiie  Sacred  Interpreter;   or,    a  practical  Introduction 
toward  a  beneficial  Reading];  and  a  thorough  Understanding  of  tiie  Holy 
Bii)Ie.     Fifth  edition.     Carlisle,  1796.     2  vols.  8vo,  with  cuts. 
It  was  first  published  in  1Y46,  and  translated  into  German  by  F.  E.  Rambach 
(Rostock,  1750,  8vo),  but  is  a  work  of  no  great  merit. 

Conybeare,  J.  J. — The  Bampton  Lectures  for  the  year  1824,  being  an  At- 
tempt to  trace  the  History  and  to  ascertain  the  Limits  of  the  secondary 
and  spiritual  Interprettition  of  Scripture.     Oxford,  1824.     8vo. 

Conybeare,  W.  D. — Elementary  Course  of  Theological  Lectures.  London, 
1836.     12mo. 

Dannh.^.tjer,  J.  C. — Hermcneutica  Sacra,  sive  methodus  exponendarum 
Sacrarum  Literarum.     Argciitor,  1654.     8vo. 


742  BIBLIOGRAPHY   OF    HERMENEUTICS. 

Dathe,  J.  A. — Opuscula  ad  Crisin  et  luterpretationem  Veteris  Testamenti 

(ciiitcd  by  Roseniniiller).     Lips.,  1795.    See  Gi.assius. 
Davidson,  Samuel. — Sacrud  Hermeneutics  developed  and  applied,  includ- 
ing a  History  of  Biblical  Interpretation  from  the  earliest  of  the  Fathers 
to  the  Reformation.     Edinburgh,  1843.    8vo. 
A  learned  and   very  valuable  work,  but  lacks  completeness,  and  is  dispropor- 
tionate in  its  severjil  parts. 

Davison,  John. — Discourses  on   Prophecy.      Oxford,   1821.     8vo.     Fifth 

edition,  1845. 
De  Rossi,  G.  B. — Sinopsi  della  Ermeneutica  Sacra.     Parma,  1819. 
DiESTEi/,  L. — Gescliichte  des  altcn  Testaments  in  der  Christlichen  Kircbe. 

Jena,  1868.     8vo. 
Dixon,  Joseph. — A  General  Introduction   to  the  Sacred  Scriptures  in  a 

series  of  Dissertations,  Critical,  Hermeneutical,  and  Historical.     Dublin, 

1852.    2  vols.  8vo.     Baltimore,  1853.     3  vols,  in  one,  8v(). 
Dissertation  xii,  in  vol.  i,  consisting  of  eight  chapters,  sets  forth  succinctly  the 
principles  of  Roman  Catholic  Hermeneutics. 

Dobie,  David. — A  Key  to  the  Bil)le:  Being  an  Exposition  of  tiie  History, 
Axioms,  and  General  Laws  of  Sacred  Interpretation.  New  York,  1856. 
12mo. 

Doedes,  J.  J. — Manual  of  Hermeneutics  for  the  Writings  of  the  New  Test- 
ament.    Translated  from  the  Dutch  by  G.  W.   Stegmann.     Edinburgh, 
1867.     12mo. 
Brief,  but  excellent,  and  well  worthy  of  repeated  study. 

DoEPKE,    J.    C.  C.  —  Ilermeneutik   der  neutestameutlichen   Schriftsteller. 
Lpz..  1829.     8vo. 
Evinces  great  learning  and  careful  research, 

Dukes,  L.     Sec  Ewai.d  and  Dukes. 

EicnsTAEDT.     See  ]\IoRUS. 

Ei.LicoTT,  C.  J. — Scripture  and  its  Interpretation.     One  of  the  essays  in 

Aids  to  Faith — Replies  to  Essays  and  Reviews.     London,  1863.     8vo. 
Elster,  Ernst. — De  medii  aeviThcologiaExegetica.  Gottingen,  1855.  8vo. 
EwALD,  II.     See  Ewald  and  Dukes. 
EwALD  and  Dukes. — Beitrasi^e  zur  Geschiclite  der  iiltesten  Auslegung  und 

Sclirifterklurung  des  altcn  Testament,     3  vols.  8vo.     Stuttgart,  1844. 
Ernesti,  John  August. — Institutio  Interpretis  Novi  Testamenti  ad  usus 

lectiontini.     Ll[)s.,  1701.     8vo.     Fifth  edition,  edited  by  Amnion,  1809. 
A  great  work  for  its  day,  almost  an  epoch-making  book,  and  still  useful,  though 
superseded  by  later  treatises. 

Elements  of  Biblical  Criticism  and  Interpretation,  translated  from 

the  Latin  of  Ernesti,  Keil,  Beck,  and  Morns,  and  accompanied  with 
notes,  by  Moses  Stuart.  Andover,  1827.  12mo.  This  translation  was 
republished,  -with  additional  observations,  by  Henderson.     London,  1827. 

Principles    of    Biblical    Interpretation,   translated  from    the    Insti- 
tutio Interpretis  of  J.    A.  Ernesti,  l)y  Charles  H.  Terrot.      Edinburgh 
(Biblical  Cabinet),  1843.     2  vols.  12mo. 
Terrot's  is  the  best  English  translation. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY   OF   HERMENEUTICS.  748 

Fairbairn,  Patrick. — Hermeucutical  Manual;  or,  Introduction  to  the 
Exegetical  Sliuly  of  the  Scriptures  of  the  New  Testament.  Edinburgh, 
1858.     8vo.     Phihi.,  1859. 

The  Typoh)gv  of  Scripture,  viewed  in  conne.xiou  with  the  entire 

Scheme  of  the  Divine  Dispensations.  Vol.  i,  Edinliurgli,  1845;  vol.  ii, 
1847.  8vo.  Fifth  edition,  revised  and  enlarged,  Edinb.,  1870.  New 
York,  1877. 

Propiiecy,  viewed  in  its  distinctive  Nature,   its  special  Function, 


and  projjer  Interpretation.     Edinb.,  1865.     New  York,  18G6.     8vo. 
All  these  productions  of  Fairbairn  are  works  of  enduring  value. 
Flacius,  Matthias. — Clavis  Scripturae  Sacrae,  seu  de  sermone  Sacraruni 
Literarum.    Basle,  1567.   Folio.     Edited  by  Musseus.    Jena,  1674.    Lips., 
1695.     Erfurt,  1719. 
Copious  in  material,  and  executed  with  great  learning  and  abihty  for  the  time 
when  it  appeared. 

Forbes.     See  Pareau. 

Francke,  a.   H. — Manuductio   ad   lectiouem   Sacrae   Scripturae.     Halle, 
1693.    8vo.     London,  1706. 

Proelectiones    Hei'meneuticae  ad  viam  dextre   indagaudi  et  expo- 

nendi  sensuni  Sacrae  Scripturae.     Halle,  1717. 

A    Guide    to    the    Reading   and    Study  of   tlie   Holy    Scriptures. 

Translated  by  William  Jaques  with  life  of  Francke.    London,  1813.    8v(), 
Phila.,  1823.     12mo. 

Frankel,   Z. — Ueber  den   Einfluss   der   palastinischen   Exegese    auf   den 

alexandiinisclie  Hermeneutik.     Lpz.,  1851.     8vo. 
Fbanzius,  Wolfgang. — Tractatus  theologicus  novus  et  perspicuus  de  In- 

terpretatione  Sacraruni  Scripturarum,  etc.     Wittenberg,  1619.    4to. 
Several  times  reprinted.     Sixth  ed.,  1708.     Controversial,  and  of  little  worth. 

Gablek,  J.  P. — Entwurf  einer  Hermeneutik  des  neuen  Testament.     Alt- 
dorf,  1788.    4to. 

Gerard,   Gilbicrt. — Institutes   of    Biblical    Criticism,   or    Heads   of   tlie 

course  of  Lectures  on  that  subject,  read  in  the  University  of  Aberdeen. 

Edinb.,  1808.     8vo.      Boston,  1833. 
Gerhard,  John. — Tractatus  dc  legitima  Scripturae  Sacrae  Interpretatione. 

Jena,  1610.   4to. 
Geriiauser,  G.  B. — Biblische  Hermeneutik.     Zweiter  Theil:  Die  Grund- 

satze  der  Schriftauslegung.     Kempten,  1829.    8vo. 
Germar,  F.  H. — Die  panharmonische  Interpretation  der  heiligen  Schrift. 

Ein  Versuch.     Schleswig,  1821.    8vo. 

Beitrag  zur  allgemeinen    Hermeneutik  und  zu  deren  Anwendung 

auf  die  theologische.     Altoiia,  1828.    8vo. 

Die  hermeneutischen  Mangel  der  sogenannten  grammatisch-histor- 


ischen,  eigentlich  aber  der  Tact-Interpretation.     Halle,  1834.     Svo. 
Kritik  der  modcrnen  Exegese,  nach  den  hermeneutisclien  Maximcn 


eines  competenten  Philologen.      Halle,  1841.     Svo. 
Suggestive  dissertations,  still  worthy  of  perusaL 


744  BIBLIOGRAPHY   OF   HERMENEUTICS. 

Gerson,  John. — Propositiones  de  sensu  literal!  Sacrae  Scripturae.  Opera, 
vol.  i.     Antwerp,  1706.     Folio. 

Glaikk.     See  Janssens. 

Glassius.  Solomon. — Philologiae  sacrae,  qua  totius  sacrosnnctae  Veteris  et 

Novi  Testameiiti  Scripturae  turn  stylus  et  literatura,  turn  sensus  et  genu- 

iiisa  Iiiterpretationis  ratio  expenditur.     Jena,  1638.    4to. 

Most  (.■oireet  edition,  Frankfort  and  Hamburg,   1653.    4to.     Fullest  of  the  old 

editions,  with  Preface  by  Budda;us,  Lips.,  1725.      New  edition,  with  valuable 

additions  by  Dathe  and  Bauer,  Lips.,  1776-97.     3  vols.  8vo.     A  work  of  cou- 

siderable  value. 

GoLDiiAGEx.  Hermann. — lutroductio  in  Sacram  Scripturam  Veteris  et 
Novi  Te.staiuenti.     Maintz,  three  parts,  176G-C8.     8vo. 

GRiESB.\crr.  J.  J. — Vorlesungen  iiber  die  Hermeneutik  des  neuen  Testa- 
ments; herausgegeben  vou  J.  C.  S.  Steiner.     Nuremberg,  1815.    Svo. 

Guentnicr,  G.  J.  B. — Hermeneutica  Biblica  generalis  juxta  Priucipia  Ca- 
tholica.    Prague,  1848.     Vienna,  1851.     Svo. 

Henderson,  E.     See  Ernesti. 

HiLLER,  M. — Syntagma  Hermeneutica.     Tubingen,  1711.    4to. 

Hirsciifeld,  H.  S. — Der  Geist  der  talmudisclien  Auslegung  der  Bibel. 
Erster  Tiieii,  Halacliisclie  Exegese.     Berlin,  1840.    Svo. 

Der  Geist   der  ersten    Schrift-auslegungeu,    oder   die    hagadische 


Exegese.     Berlin,  1847.     8vo. 

HoEPFNER,  C.  F. — Gnindlinien  zu  einer  fruchtbareu  Auslegung  der  beili- 

gen  Schrift.     Lpz.,  1827.     Svo. 

IIofmann,  J.  Christian  K.,  von. — Biblische  Hermeneutik.     Nordlingen, 
1880.     18mo. 
A  new  and  very  valuable  contribution  to  the  Science  of  Biblical  Interpretation. 
It  is  a  posthumous  publicalion,  edited  by  W.  Volck. 

IIouNE,  Thomas  ITartwell. — An  Introduction  to  tiie  Critical  Study  and 
Knowledge  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  London,  1818.  3  vols.  Svo.  Many 
editions.  The  second  volume  of  the  tenth  edition  was  edited  and  nearly 
rewritten  by  Samuel  Davidson:  The  Text  of  the  Old  Testament,  with 
a  Treatise  on  Sacred  Inteipretation,  1856.  Eleventh  edition,  revised 
and  largely  rewritten,  by  John  Ayre  and  S.  P.  Tregelles.  London,  1860. 
4  vols.  Svo.  Thirteenth  edition,  1872. 
The  second  volume,  revised  by  Ayre,  is  devoted  to  tbe  Criticism  and  Interpreta- 
tion of  Scripture,  and  is  a  comprehensive  and  useful  work. 

Huetius, Peter  Daniel. — De  Interpretatione  libri  duo;  quorum  prior  est, 
dc  o[)timo  genere  iuterpretandi:  alter,  de  Claris  interprotibus.  Stadge, 
1680.     16mo. 

Immer,  A, — Hermeneutik  des  neuen  Testaments.    Witteirberg,  1873,    Svo. 

Hermencutics  of  the  New  Testament.      Translated  from  the  Ger- 
man by  A.  II.  Newman.     Andover,  1877.     Svo. 
One  of  the  best  hermeneutical  treatises  of  modern  times. 

Irons,  W.  J. — The  Bible  and  its  Interpreters.  Miracles  and  Prophecy. 
Second  edition.     Loudon,  1S69.    Svo, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY   OF   HERMENEUTICS.  745 

Jackson,  Arthur. — A  Help  for  the  Understanding  of  the  Holy  Scripture. 

Camb.,  1643.     3  vols.  4to. 
Jackson,  Thomas. — The  true  Sense  of  Scripture  determinable  by  Rules  of 

Art.     Works  xii,  174  (folio  edition  iii,  895). 
Jahn,  J. — Enchiridion  Hermeneuticae  gencralis  tabularura  Veteris  et  Novi 

Foederis.     Vienna,  1813.    8vo. 
A  work  of  much  good  sense.     See  Sandbichler  and  Stuart. 

Janssens,  J.  Hermann. — Hermeneutica  Sacra,  sen  lutroductio  in  omnen 
ac  singulos  libros  sacros  Veteris  et  Novi  Foederis.  Maintz,  1818. 
2  vols.  8vo. 

Hernieneutique  Sacr6e,  ou  Introduction  a  I'Ecriture  Sainto.     Trad. 

du  Lat.  par  J.  J.  Pacaud.  Paris,  1837.  3  vols.  8vo.  New  ed.,  rev.  by 
J.  B.  CUaire,  1840.     Fifth  ed.,  rev.  by  Sionnet,  1855. 

Jones,  William. — Course  of  Lectures  on  the  Figurative  Language  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures.  London,  1787.  8vo.  Second  edition,  1789.  Also  in 
vol.  iv.  of  his  Theological  and  Miscellaneous  Works.     London,  1810. 

JowETT,  Benjamin. — On  the  Interpretation  of  Scripture.  One  of  tlie  es- 
says in  Essays  and  Reviews  by  eminent  English  Churchmen.  London, 
1861.     8vo. 

Kaiser,  G.  P.  C. — Grundriss  eines  Systems  der  neutestamentlichen  Iler- 
meueutik.    Erlangen,  1817.     8vo. 

Keil,  Karl  A.  G. — Do  historica  librorum  sacrorum  Interpretatioue  ej  us- 
que necessitate.     Lips.,  1788.     8vo.  ■ 

Ueber  die  historische  Erklarunjjsart  der  heili^en  Sclirift  und  deren 

Nothwendigkeit.     Aus  d.  Lat.  von  C.  A.  Henipel.     Lpz.,  1793.     8vo. 

Lehrbuch  der  Hermeneutik  des  neuen  Testaments  nach  Grundsatzen 


der  grammatisch-liistorischen  Interpretation.     L|)Z.,  1810.     8vo. 
Elcnienta  Hermeneutices  Novi  Testament!  (Latine  reddita  a  C.  A.  G. 


Emmerling).     Lips.,  1811.     ISino. 
All  these  treatises  display  the  skill  of  a  master,  and  emphasize  the  necessity  of 
strict  grammatico-historical  interpretation. 

Klausen.     See  Clausen. 

KoHLGRUBER,  J. — Henncneutica  Biblica  generalis.     Vienna,  1850.    8vo. 

Lamar,  J.  S. — The  Organon  of  Scripture;  or,  the  Inductive  Method  of 
Biblical  luterprctation.     Philadelphia,  1860.      ISmo. 

Landerer. — Article  Hermeneutik  in  Herzog,  Real-Eucyklopiidie  (edition 
Stuttgart  and  Hamburg,  1856).     Corap.  Schmidt. 

Lange,  Joachim. — Hermeneutica  Sacra.     Halle,  1733.     8vo. 

Lange,  J.  P. — Grundriss  der  biblischen  Hermeneutik.  Heidelb.,  1878.  8vo. 
Suggestive,  well  arranged,  compact,  and  convenient  for  use. 

Lee,  Samuel. — Six  Sermons  on  the  Study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  their 
Nature,  Interpretation,  and  some  of  their  most  Important  Doctrines. 
London,  1830.      8vo. 

An  Inquiry  into  the  Nature,  Progress,  and  End  of  Prophecy.  Cam- 
bridge, 1849.     8vo. 

Lindanus,  W.  D. — De  optimo  Scripturas  interi^retandi  gciicre  lihri  iii. 
Coloniae,  1558.     IGmo. 


74a  BIBLIOGRAPHY  OF  HERMENEUTICS. 

Litton,  E.  A. — Guide  to  the  Study  of  the  Holy  Scripture.     London,  1860. 

LoEiiNis,  J.  M.  A. — Grundzuge  dcr  biblischen  Hermcneutilc  und  Kritik. 
Giessen,  18o9.     8vo. 

Loi:scHER,V.  E. — BreviariumTheologiaeExegeticae.    Frankfort,  1715.    Bvo. 

Breviarium    Theologiae    Exegeticae    legitiniam    Scripturae   Sacrae 

Interpretationem,  uec  uon  studii  biblici  rutiouem  succincte  tradens. 
Wittenberg,  1719.     8vo. 

LowTH,  W. — Directions  for  the  Profitable  Reading  of  the  Holy  Scriptures; 
Avitli  some  Observations  for  confirming  their  Divine  Authority,  and  illus- 
trating their  Difficulties.     Seventh  edition,  London,  1799.     12ino. 

LuECKE,  G.  C.  F. — Grundriss  der  neutestamentlicheu  Heriucneutik  und 
ihrcr  Geschichte.     Gottingeu,  1817.    8vo. 

LuTz,  J.  L.  S. — Biblische  Hermeneutik.  Pforzheim,  1849.  Bvo.  Second 
ed.,  edited  by  Adolf  Lutz,  1861. 

Macknight,  James. — Concerning  the  Right  Interpretation  of  the  Writings 
in  which  the  Revelations  of  God  are  contained. 
Essay  viii,    appended  to  his  Translation  and   Commentary  on  the  Apostolical 
Epistles.     Many  editions. 

Maimonides,  Moses  (Rambam).— Moreh  Nebuchim,  or  Guide  of  the  Per- 
plexed.    Many  editions  and  translations. 

Maitland,  Charles. — Tlie  Apostles'  School  of  Prophetic  Interpretation, 
with  its  History  to  tlie  present  time.     London,  1849.     8vo. 

Maitlaxd,  S.  R. — Eight  Essays  on  the  Mystical  Interpretation  of  Scrip- 
ture.    London,  1852.     8vo. 

Maksh,  Herbert.— Lectures  on  the  Criticism  and  Interpretation  of  the 
Bible.     London,  1838  and  1842.     8vo. 

Martianay,  Jean. — Tr.utS  method ique,  ou  maniere  d'expliquer  I'Ecriture 
par  le  secours  de  trois  Syntaxes,  la  propre,  la  figurJie,  riiarmonique. 
Paris,  1704.     12mo. 

J—  Methode  Sacr6e  pour  apprendre  et  expliquer  I'Ecriture  Sainte  par 

I'Ecriture  meine.     Paris,  1716.     8vo. 

Matthaei,  G.  C.  R.— Uebersicht  der  Fehler  der  neutcstamcntlichen  Exe- 
gese.     Giittingen,  1835.    8vo. 

Mayisr,  G. — Institutio  interpretis  sacri.     Vindobonce,  1789.    8vo. 

M'Clelland,  Alexander.— Manual  of  Sacred  Interpretation,  for  the  Spe- 
cial Benefit  of  Junior  Theological  Students;  but  intended  for  private 
Christians  in  general.     New  York,  1842.      12nio. 

A  Brief  Treatise  on  the  Canon  and  Interpretation  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures.    New  York,  1850, 
Tliis  is  a  second  and  enlarged  edition  of  the  preceding.     Another  revised  edition 
appeared  in  1860 

Meier,  G.  F. — Versuch  eiuer  allgemeinen  Auslegungskunst.  Halle,  1756. 
8vo. 

Meyer,  G.  W. — Versuch  einer  Hermeneutik  des  alten  Testaments.     Erster 
Tlieil,  Liil)eck.  1799.  8vo.    Zweiter  Theil,  1800.   8vo.    New  edition,  1813. 
Rationalistic,  but  full  of  excellent  thoughts ;  concise  and  comprehensive. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY   OF   IIERMENEUTICS.  747 

Meter,  G.  W. — Gescliichtc  der  Schrifteikltirung  seit  der  Wiederherstel- 

liing  der  Wisseuschaften.     Gottingen,  1802-9.     5  vols.  8vo. 
Meyer,  Lewis. — Philosopliia  Scriptnrae  luterpres.     Eleutlieropolis,  1666. 

4to.     Edited,  with  preface  and  various  notes,  by  J.  S.  Semler.     Hulle, 

1776.     8vo. 
Moegelin,  W. — Die  allegorische  Bibelauslegung,  besonders  in  der  Predigt, 

historisch  und  didactiscli  betrachtet.     Niiniberg,  1844.     8vo. 
Monsperger,  J.  J. — Institutiones  Hernieneuticae  sacrae  Veteris  Testamenti 

praelectionibus   academicis  accommodatae.      Pars  i,   Vindobonse,   1776. 

8vo.     Pars  ii,  1777,    8vo.     Second  edition,  1784. 
MoRUS,  S.  F.  N. — Super  Hermeneutica  Novi  Testamenti  Acroases  Acade- 

micae.     Edited,    with   additions,    by   Eichstadt.     Vol.  i.  Lips.,   1797; 

vol.  ii,  1803.     8vo. 
Consists  substantially  of  lectures  on  Ernesti's  Institutes. 

Muenscher,  Joseph. — On  Types  and  the  Typical  Interpretation  of  Scrip- 
ture.    Article  in  the  American  Biblical  Repository  for  Jan.,  1841. 
Manual  of  Biblical  Interpretation.      Gambler,  Ohio,  1865.     16mo. 

Neubauer,  E.  F.     See  Ramb.vch. 

Nevin,  J.  W. — Sacred  Hermeueutics.     Article  in  the  Mercersburg  Review, 

for  1878,  pp.  5-38. 
Newman,  A.  IT.     See  Immer. 

NicHOLLS,  Benjamin"  Elliot. — Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Scrip- 
tures.    Published  by  the  American  S.  S.  Union.     Piiila.,  1853.     8vo. 
Originally  published  by  the  London  Christian  Knowledge  Society  under  the  title 
of  The  Mine  Explored. 

NoESSELT,  J.  A. — Exercitationes  ad  Sacrarum  Scriptuarum  Interpreta- 
tionem.     Halle.    4  vols,  8vo. 

Olearius,  J. — Elementa  Hermeneuticae  Sacrae  cum  pi'axi  hermen,  in  qui- 
busdam  exemplis.     Lips..  1699. 

Olshausen,  H. — Ein  Wort  iiber  tiefern  Schriftsinn.   Konigsberg,  1834.  8vo, 

Die  biblisclie  Schriftauslegung;  noch  ein  Wort  iiber  tiefern  Schrift- 
sinn.    Sendschreiben  an  Steudel.     Hamburg,  1835.    8vo. 

Osterwald,  J.  F. — The  Necessity  and  Usefulness  of  Reading  the  Holy 
Scriptures;  and  the  Disposition  with  which  they  ought  to  be  read. 
Translated  by  J,  Moore.     London,  1750.     18mo, 

Owen,  John. — Tiie  Causes,  Ways,  and  Means  of  understanding  the  Mind 
of  God  as  Revealed  in  his  Word,     Works,  iii,  369. 

Pagninus,  Sanctes. — Isagoge  ad  Sacras  Literas.   Isagoge  ad  mysticos  Sacrae 

Scriptnrae  sensus.     Lugduni,  1536.     Folio, 
Fareau,  J.  H, — Institutio  Interpretis  Veteris  Testamenti.    Trajecti.    1833. 

Bvo, 
Principles  of  Interpretation  of  the  Old  Testament,    Translated  from 

the  original  by  Patrick  Forbes,     Edinburgh  (Biblical  Cabinet),   1835 

1840.     3  vols,  13mo, 
A  very  excellent  and  useful  ti'eatise. 


748  BIBLIOGRAPHY   OF   HERMENEUTICS. 

Pareau,  L.  G. — Ilernicneutica  Codicis  Sacri.     Gronigen,  1846.     8vo. 
Peirce,  B.  K. — The  "Word  of  God  Opened.     Its  Inspiration,  Canon,  and 

Interpretation  considered  and  illustrated.     New  York,  1868.     16mo. 
Perion,  Joachim. — Commeutarii  de  optimo  genere  interpretandi.     Pari;?, 

1548. 
Pfkiffer,  Augustus. — Hermeneutica  Sacra,  sivc  luculenta  de  legitinia  In- 

ter[)retatione   Sacrariiin   Literarum   Tractatns.      Dresden,    1684.     ISino. 

Revised  and  enlarged,  with  Preface,  by  S.  B.  Carpzov  (Thesaurus  Her- 

mencuticus).     Lips,  and  Fraukf.,  1690.    4to. 
Pfeiffer,  J.  E. — Elenienta  Hermeneuticae  Universalis,  veterurn  atque  re- 

centiorum  et  proprias  qiiasdam  praeceptiones  complexa.    Jena,  1743.    8vo. 
Institutiones  Hermeneuticae  Sacrae,  veteruni   atque  recentiormn  et 

propria  quaedam  praecepta  complexae.     Erlangen,  1771.     8vo. 
Planck,  G.  J. — Einleitung  in  die  theologischen  Wissenschafteu.     Lpz., 

1795.     2  vols.  8vo. 
Introduction  to  Sacred  Philology  and  Interpretation.     Translated 

from  the  German  of  G.  J.  Planck,  by  S.  H.  Turner.     Edinburgh  (Biblical 

Cabinet),  1834.     12mo.     New  York,  1834. 
Worthy  of  repeated  perusal. 

Rambach.  John  James. — Institutiones  Hermeneuticae  Sacrae,  variis  obser- 
vationilnis  copiosissimisque  excmplis  biblicis  illustratae,  cum  praefa- 
tione  J.  F.  Buddei.     Jena,  1723.     Svo.     Eighth  edition,  1764. 

Of  this  work  Davidson  says :  "  In  the  nature  and  richness  of  its  materials,  the 
perspicuous  method  in  which  they  are  presented,  and  the  judicious  use  of  an- 
cient as  well  as  modern  literature,  it  leaves  preceding  works  far  behind." 

Commentatio  Hermeneutica  de  scnsus  mvstici  criteriis  ex  sfenuinis 

prineipiis  deducta,    neccssariisque  cautelis  circumscripta.     Jena,   1728. 
8vo,     Second  edition,  1741. 

Erliinterung  iiber  sciine  eigne  Institutiones  Hermeneuticae  Sacrae, 


darin  nicht  nur  dieses  ganze  Werk  erkliirt,  imgleiclieii  manches  von  ihm 
geiiudert  und  verbessert,  sondern  auch  neue  henneneutisohe  R"gein 
und  Anmcrkungen  liinzugethan,  alles  alter  mit  mehr  als  1000  erkliirten 
Oertern  der  Sehrift  eriautert  worden ;  mit  einer  Vorrede  von  der  Vor- 
trefiiichkeit  der  rambaeliisclien  Ileimenentik,  in  zwei  Theilen  ans  Liclit 
gestellt  von  E.  F.  Neul)auer.     Giessen,  1738.    4to.    (See  also  Reiersen.) 

Ranolder,  J. — Ilermeneuticie  Biblicae  generalis  Principia  ratioualia  Chris- 
tiana et  Catholica.     Lips.,  1839.     8vo. 

Raetze,  J.  G. — Die  hoclisten  Prinzipien  der  Schrifterklarung.  Lpz.,  1814. 
8vo. 

Reckenberger,  J.  L. — Tractatus  de  studio  Sacrae  Hermeneuticae.  in  quo 
de  ejus  natura  et  indole,  ahsoluta  in  omnibus  Tlieologiae  partibus  neces- 
sitate, impedimenlis  ao  mediis  agitur.     Jena,  1732.     8vo. 
Cliicfly  based  on  Rambach. 

Reichel,  v. — Introductio  in  llermcneuticam  Biblicam.  Vienna,  1839.  8vo. 

Reiersen,  Andreas. — Hermeneutica  Sacra  per  Taljulas,  seu  Tabuhie  syn- 
opticae  in  Institutiones  Hermeneuticae  Sacrae  earuniquj  lilustiationera 
seu  Erliiuterung  J.  J.  Rambacliii.     Lips.,  1741.     8vo. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY   OF   IlERMENEUTICS.  743 

Reitmayer,  Fkanz  Xaver. — Lelirbuch  der  biblisclien  Hermeneutik,  lier- 
ausgegeben  von  Thalliofer.     Kempten,  1874.      8vo. 

Rivet,  Andrew. — Isagnge,   sen    Introductio  generalis  ad   Scripturam  Sa- 
crum Veteris  et  Novi  Testanienti.     Ludg.  Batav.,  1G27.     4to. 
Chapters  xiv  to  xxiv  of  this  work  are  devoted  to  Hermeneutics. 

RosENMUELLER,  J.  G. — Historia  Intcrpretationis  Librorum  Sncrorum  in  Ec- 
clesia  Christiana,  ab  Apostolorum  aetate  ad  literarum  iustaurationem. 
Hildburg,  1795-1814.     5  vols.  12mo. 
An  excellent  review  of  patristic  and  mediseval  interpretation. 

RosENMUELLER,  E.  F.  K. — Ilandbucli  fiir  die  Literatur  der  biblisclien  Kritik 
und  Exegese.     Gottingcn,  1797-1800.     4  vols. 

Salmeron,  ALpnoNso.  —  De  Scriptnrae  sensu  literali  et  spiritual,  etc. 
Opera,  vol.  i,  pp.  G9-3G9.     ColnniiB,  1612.     Folio. 

Salmond,  C.  D.  F. — Article  Hermeneutics  in  the  new  edition  of  the  En- 
cyclopaedia Britannica. 

Sandbichler.  a. — Darstellnng  der  Regeln  einer  allgemeinen  Auslegungs- 
kunst  von  den  Biichern  des  neuen  und  alten  Buudes,  nach  Jalui.  Salz- 
burg, 1813.     8vo. 

Sawyer,  Leicester  A. — The  Elements  of  Biblical  Interpretation,  or  an 
Exposition  of  the  Laws  by  wiiich  the  Scriptures  are  capable  of  being  cor- 
rectly interpreted,  together  witli  an  Analysis  of  the  Rationalistic  and  Mys- 
tic Modes  of  interpreting  them,  adapted  to  common  Use,  and  designed  as 
an  Auxiliary  to  the  Ci'itical  Study  of  the  Bible.    New  Haven,  1836.    12mo. 

ScnAEFER,  J.  N. — Ichnogrnpliia  Hermeneuticae  Sacrae.    Maintz,  1784.    8vo. 

ScHLEiERMACiiER,  F. — Hermcncutik  und  Kritik  mit  besouderer  Rucksicht 
auf  das  neue  Testament.     Berlin,  1838.    8vo.    (Vol.  vii  of  his  Theological 
"Works.) 
Masterly  in  many  of  its  statements,  but  tinged  with  speculative  philosophy. 

Schmidt,  W. — Article  Hermeneutik  in  new  edition  of  Herzog's  Real-Ency- 
klopiidie.     Lpz.,  1880.     Comp.  Landerer. 

ScHMiTTER,  A.— Grundlinien  der  biblisclien  Hermeneutik.  Regensb.,  1844. 
8vo. 

ScHULER,  P.  H.— Geschichte  der  populiiren  Schrifterklarung  unter  den 
Cliristen.     Tubingen,  1787.     8vo, 

ScoTT,  J. — Principles  of  New  Testament  Quotation  established  and  applied 
to  Biblical  Science.     Edinburgh,  1875.      13mo. 

Seemiller,  Sebastian. — Institutioncs  ad  Interpretationem  Sacrae  Scrip- 
tnrae, sen  Hermeneutica  Sacra.     Augsburg,  1779.     8vo. 

Seilsu,  G.  F.  —  Biblische  Hermeneutik;  oder  Grundsatze  und  Regeln 
zur  Erlauterung  der  heiligen  Schrift  des  alten  und  neuen  Testaments. 
Erlangen,  1800.      8vo. 

Bil)lical    Hermeneutics,   or   the    Art    of   Scripture    Interpretation. 

From  tlie  German  of  George  Frederic  Seller,  with  Notes,  Strictures,  and 
Supplements  from  tlie  Dutch  of  J.  Heringa.     Translated  from  the  origi- 
nals, with  additional  notes  and  observations,  by  William  Wright.     Lon- 
don, 1835.     8vo. 
Slightly  rationalistic,  but  on  the  whole  a  very  comprehensive  and  useful  work. 


750  BIBLIOGRAPHY   OF   HERMENEUTICS. 

Semler,  J.   S.  —  Vorbereitung  zur  llieologisclion  Ilermeneutik.      Halle, 

1760-G9.     4  vols.  8vo. 
Institutio  bievior  ad   lilieralem   eruditiouem  theologicam.     Halle, 


1765.     8vo.     See  Meter,  Lewis. 
Apparatus  ad  liberalem  Nuvi  Testamenti  Intcrpretationem.     Halle, 

1767.     8vo. 
Apparatus  ad  liberalem  Veteris  Testamenti  Interpretatiouem.    Halle, 


1773.     8vo. 
Nc'ucr  Versuch,  die  gemeinniitzige  Auslcgung  und  Anwendung  des 


t5^ 

neueu  Testaments  zu  befordern.     Halle,   1786.     8vo. 

All  Semler's  works  are  rich  in  suggestion,  but  replete  with  rationalistic  errors, 
and  have  exerted  a  pernicious  influence  on  German  exegesis. 
Setwin,  J.  B. — Ilermeneuticae  Bil^Ucae  Institutiones  tlieoretico-practieae 
secundum  ])liil()l(>giac   regulam  ad  analogiam    fidei  Ecclesiae  Romanae 
Catholicae  in  compendium  collatae.     Vienna,  1872.     8vo. 
Simon,  R. — Histoire  Critique  du  Vicux  Testament.     Amst.,  new  edition, 
1685.     4to. 

A  Critical  History  of  the  Old  Testament.     London,  1882.     4to. 

English  translation  of  the  preceding. 

Histoire   Critique    des    principaux    Coramentateurs    da    Nouveau 


Testament.     Rotterdam,  1693. 

Sionnet.     See  Janssens. 

SixT,   G.   A. — De  Intcrpretatioue  universa  ab  Ernestio  obscrvata  notulis 

aucta.     1785. 
SiXTUs    Senensis.  —  Ars   interprctandi    Scripturas   Sacras    alisolntissima. 

Forms  the  third  book  of  his  Bibliotheca  Sancta.     Venice,  1566.    Folio. 

Often  reprinted. 
Smith,  John  Pye. — Principles  of  Interpretation  as  applied  to  the  Prophe- 
cies of  Holy  Scripture.     London,  1839.     Second  edition,  1831. 
Stark,  W. — Beitru;i'e  zur  Vervollkommung  der  Ilermeneutik,  insbcsondere 

des  Neucn  Testament.     Two  Parts,  Jena,  1817-18. 
Staudlin,  K.  F. — De  Interpretationc  librorum  Novi  Testamenti  historica 

non  unice  vera.     Gottingen,  1807. 
Stegmann.     See  Doedes. 
Stein,  K.  W. — Ue!)erden  BegrifTund  den  oberstcn  Grundsatz  der  historls- 

clien  Interpretation  des  neuen  Testament.     Lpz.,  1815.     8vo. 
An  able  and  suggestive  treatise. 
Steinek.     Sec  Grie.sbacii. 
Stier,   R. — Andeutungcn    fur    gliiubigcs    Scliriftvcrstiindniss    im    Ganr.cn 

und  Einzelnen.     Konigsberg,  1824.     8vo. 
STORij,  G.  C. — Opnscula  Aca.lemica  ad  Interpretatiouem  Librorum  Sacrorum 

pertinentia.     Tubingen,  1796.     8vo. 
• Essay  on  the  Flislorical  Sense  of  the  New  Testament.     Translated 

by  J.  W.  Gibbs.     Boston,  1817.     i2mo. 
Stowe,   C.   E.— The  Right  Interpretation  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.     The 

Helps  and  the  Hindrances.     Bibliotheca  Sacra,  1853,  pp.  34-62. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY    OF    HERMENEUTICS.  751 

Stttart,  Moses. — Hints  on  the  Interpretation  of  Prophecy.    Andover,  1342. 
12nio. 

Dissertations  on  tlie  Importance  and  best  Metliod  of  Studying  the 

original  Languages  of  the  Bible,  by  Jahn  and  otlicrs.     Translated   from 
the  originals,  nnd  accompanied  -with  notes.     Andover,  1827.     8vo. 

These,  like  all  of  Professor  Stuart's  writings,  are  very  worthy  of  careful  perusiil. 

On  the  Alleged  Obscurity  of  Prophecy.     Article  in  tlic  American 


Biblical  Repository  for  April,  1832. 

Translation  of  Hahn,  On  the  Grammatico-Historical  Interpretation 


of  the  Scriptures,  with  additional  essay  on  the  same  subject,  iu  American 
Biblical  Repository  for  January,  1831. 

-Are  the  s;ime  Principles  of  Interpretation  to  be  applied  to  the  Scrip- 


ture as  to  other  books.     Americau  Biblical  Repository  for  January,  1832. 
See  also  Ernesti. 
SuRENHUSius,   W. — rr\U}2n  "ISD,    sive   Bt'.SAof  KaralTiayj/g,   in   quo  secundum 
Veterum  Theologicorum  Ilebraeorum  formulas  allegandi,  ct  modus  inter- 
pretandi  conciliantur  loca  ex  V.  in  N.  T.  allegata.     Amst.,  1713.     4to. 
Unsurpassed  in  the  field  it  occupies. 

Teller.     See  Turretin. 

Tereot.     See  Ernesti. 

Tholtjck,  Augustus.— Beitrage  zur  Spracherldarung  des  neuen  Testaments. 

Halle,  1833.     8vo. 
Hints  on  the  Interpretation  of  the  Old  Testament.     Translated  by 

R.  B.  Patton  (vol.  ii  of  Edinburgh  Biblical  Cabinet).    Edinb,  1833.    16mo. 
On  the  Use  of  the  Old  Testament  in  the  New,  and  especially  in  the 


Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.     Translated  by  J.  E.  Ryland.     (Vol.  xxxix  of 
the  Biblical  Cabinet).     Edinburgh,  1842.     16mo.     Sue  Aiken. 

Hermeneutics  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  with  special  reference  to  Gal. 


iii,  16.     (Vol.  xxxix  Bil)lical  Cabinet). 
These  last  two  are  Dissertations  at  the  end  of  Tholuck's  Commentary  on  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  all  the  above  are  worthy  of  careful  study. 
Toellner,  J.   G.— Grundriss  einer  erwiesenen  Hermeueutik  der  heiligen 
Schrift.     Ziillichau,  1765.     8vo. 
Philosophical,  learned,  and  excellent  for  its  day. 
Turner,  S.  H.— Tlioughts  on  the  Origin,  Character,  and  Interpretation  of 

Scriptural  Prophecy?  New  York,  1851.  12mo.  See  also  Planck. 
Tdrretin,  J.  A.— De  Sacrae  Sciipturae  interpretandae  methodo  Tractatus 
bipartitus,  in  quo  falsac  mnltorum  interpretum  hypotheses  refelluntur, 
veraque  interpretandae  sacrae  Scripturae  methodus  adstruitur.  Dort, 
1728.  8vo.  Revised  and  enlarged  by  G.  A.  Teller.  Frankfort,  1776.  8yo. 
TuRPiE,  David  :\IcC.— The  Old  Testament  iu  the  New.  A  Contribution 
to  Biblical  Criticism  and  Interpretation.     liOndon,  1868.     8vo. 

Unger,  a.  F.— Populare  Hermeneutik,  oder  Anleitung  die  Schrift  auszu- 
legen  filr  Lehrer  des  Volkes  in  Schulen  und  Kirchcn.     Lpz.,  1845.     8vo, 
Unterkirciier,  C— HermeneuticaBiblicageneralis.    (Eniponti,  1834.   8vo. 
Ariglcr's  work  of  the  same  title  adapted  to  the  use  ot  Romanists  in  Austria. 


7.->2  BIBLIOGEAPHY   OF   HERMENEUTICS. 

Vail,  Stephex  M. — Hermenentics  ami  Ilomiletics;  or,  The  Study  of  the 
Original  Scriptures  and  Preacliing.  Articles  in  Methodist  Quarterlj'  Re- 
view for  1866,  pp.  37-50  and  371-386. 

Van  Mildeut,  "William. — An  Inquiry  into  the  General  Principles  of  Scrip- 
ture Interpretation,  in  eight  sermons,  preached  before  the  University  of 
Oxford  in  the  year  1814.  (Bampton  Lectures).  Oxford,  1814.  8vo. 
Third  edition,  1831. 

VoLCK,  W. — Section  on  Biblical  Hcrmeneutics  in  Zockler's  Uandbuch  der 
theologischen  Wisscnschaften.     Nordlingcn,  1883.     See  Hofmann. 

Wemtss,  Thomas. — A  Key  to  the  Symbolical  Language  of  Scripture,  by 
which  numerous  Passages  are  explained  and  illustrated.     Edinb.,  1835. 
16mo. 
Wettsteix,  J.  J. — Libelli  ad  Crisin  atque  Interpretationem  Novi  Tcsta- 

menti.     Ilalle,  17G6.     12mo. 
WniTAKER,  Y^iLLiAM. — On  the  Interpretation  of  Scripture.     Cambridge, 
1849. 
Part  of  a  disputation  on  Holy  Scripture  against  the  papists,  especially  Bellarmine 
and  Stapleton. 

WniTTAKER,  John  William. — An  Historical  and  Critical  Enquiry  into  the 
Interpretation  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.     London,  1819.     8vo. 

WuiTBY,  Daniel. — Dissertatio  de  Sacrarum  Scripturarum  Interpretatioue 
secundum  Patrum  Commentarios.     Lond.,  1714.     8vo. 

Wilke,  Christian  G. — Die  Ilermeneutik  des  neuen  Testamentes  systemat- 
isch  dargeslellt.     Lpz.,  1843.     8vo. 

Biblische  Hermoncutik  nach  katholischcn  Grundsatzen  in  streng 

systeniatischcn  Zusanimenhange  und  unter  Bcriicksichtigung  der  neu- 
csten  approbirten  hermeneutischen  Lehrbuclier.     Wurzburg,  1853.    8vo. 

Wilson,  J. — The  Scripture's  genuine  Interpreter  asserted;  or,  a  Discourse 
concerning  the  right  Interpretation  of  Scripture.     Lond.,  1GT8.     8vo. 

WiNTHUOP,  Edward. — The  Premium  Essay  on  the  Characteristics  and 
Laws  of  Prophetic  Symbols.     Second  edition.     New  York,  1854.     12mo. 

WoLLius,   C. — Hermeneufica  Novi  Foederis  acroamatico-dogmatica  certis- 
simis  dcfecatae  philosophiae   piincipiis  corroborata  eximiisque  omnium 
Theologiae  Christianae  partium  usibus  inscrviens.     Lijis.,  1736.     4to. 
Appendix  to  Blackwall's  Auctores  Sacri  classici  defensi  et  illustrati. 

Wordsworth,  C. — On  the  Interpretation  of  Scripture.  An  essay  ia  Re- 
plies to  Essays  and  Reviews.     London,  1863.     8vo. 

Wright.     See  Seiler. 

Wyttenbach,  Daniel. — Elementa  Hermeneuticae  Sacrac,  eo  quo  in  scien- 
tiis  fieri  debet,  niodo  proposita.     Marburg,  1760.     8vo. 

Zachariae,  G.  T. — Einleitung  in  die  Auslegungskunst  der  heiligen  Schrift. 

Gottingcn,  1778.     8vo. 
Zenkel,  G.  p. — Elementa  Hermeneuticae  Sacrae,  methodo  naturali  con- 

cinuuta.     Jena,  1753.     8vo. 


INDEX  TO  SOEIPTURE  TEXTS. 


To  facilitate  reference  each  page  (including  foot-notes)  is  supposed  to  be  divided  into  three 
nearly  equal  sections,  designated  by  the  letters  a,  b,  and  c.  Thus,  125a  denotes  the  upper  por- 
tion of  page  125  ;  125b  denotes  the  middle  section  ;  and  125c  the  lower  part  of  of  the  page.  The 
lei  ter  n  following  a  number  indicates  that  the  passage  referred  to  is  in  a  foot-note.  The  aster- 
isk (.*}  designates  pages  on  which  the  text  referred  to  receives  some  comment  or  interpretation. 


Genesis. 

Genesis. 

Genesis. 

I. 

1- 

3. 

84ab.* 

VI. 

5. 

103a 

196a. 

XV. 

6. 

338c. 

a 

1. 

211c, 

549a,* 

551a,* 

(( 

6. 

103a. 

11 

13. 

387c. 

567a.* 

(( 

7- 

■17. 

549a. 

XVI. 

7. 

588a. 

(( 

2. 

189b.* 

a 

9. 

212b, 

567c. 

u 

10. 

588a. 

(( 

5. 

384c. 

a 

12. 

550b. 

a 

13. 

588a. 

(( 

8. 

549a.* 

u 

13. 

643a.* 

XVII. 

2- 

8. 

408b. 

it 

10. 

549b.* 

(I 

14. 

177c. 

(1 

12. 

382b. 

4i 

14. 

549a. 

VII. 

4. 

385a, 

387b.* 

11 

19. 

321c. 

a 

15. 

549a. 

(C 

3- 

-11. 

549a. 

(1 

20. 

84c.* 

n 

16. 

539a.* 

u 

12. 

385a. 

XVIII. 

2. 

381b. 

a 

17. 

639a,* 

549a. 

1( 

17. 

385a. 

11 

10- 

-14. 

321c. 

a 

20. 

649a. 

(( 

18. 

88c. 

(I 

18. 

408b. 

It 

21. 

549b. 

it 

19. 

543a.* 

it 

21 

451n. 

■ii 

26. 

549a. 

It 

22. 

86c. 

XIX. 

19. 

122a. 

a 

27. 

649b.* 

VIII. 

2. 

549a. 

11 

24. 

451n 

587b.* 

it 

28. 

549a. 

(( 

4. 

650b. 

XX. 

3- 

7. 

397a. 

it 

30. 

549a. 

(C 

21. 

196a. 

XXI. 

1. 

608b.* 

II. 

1. 

88c. 

IX. 

6. 

628a. 

11 

9. 

321c. 

(1 

2. 

382b. 

it 

8- 

-17. 

393a. 

I( 

10. 

322a. 

<( 

3. 

211c 

382b, 

551b, 

u 

9. 

667c. 

XXII. 

3,4 

. 

639n. 

567b. 

(i 

i: 

16. 

334c. 

(( 

10. 

194b. 

(t 

4. 

211c, 

*551b 

567a.* 

(( 

_, 

103a. 

a 

11. 

588a. 

<i 

5. 

212a,* 

567a. 

Li 

381b. 

i( 

12. 

588a. 

<i 

6. 

567b, 

613a.* 

0. 

89b. 

(( 

15. 

588a. 

<( 

7. 

86c,* 

567b.* 

I 

26. 

408b. 

t( 

16. 

588a. 

n 

8. 

613a.* 

u 

27. 

249a,408b,567c. 

(.( 

18. 

591a. 

it 

9. 

86c.* 

X. 

1. 

212b. 

XXV. 

12. 

212b. 

it 

10- 

14. 

163b.* 

u 

2. 

115b. 

u 

19. 

212b. 

41 

16. 

71c. 

(1 

18. 

78n. 

XXVII. 

41. 

193a. 

(( 

17. 

71c. 

u 

21. 

77a.* 

XXVIII. 

10- 

22. 

397c.* 

ii 

19. 

71b, 

268a,* 

549a. 

u 

25. 

77n. 

(( 

12. 

179b,*  397a. 

U 

20. 

549a. 

XI. 

2. 

355a. 

XXIX. 

1. 

101b. 

11 

23. 

567b. 

C( 

5. 

103b. 

11 

11. 

101b. 

II. 

1. 

89b. 

1. 

10- 

26. 

212b, 

500b, 

tl 

13. 

101b. 

'' 

15. 

408a,*412b, 

H86a, 

567c. 

11 

32. 

51 6n. 

495a*  572a. 

(1 

17- 

27. 

77n. 

XXX. 

1. 

512c. 

n 

22. 

101c. 

(1 

27. 

212b. 

u 

8. 

89n. 

ii 

24. 

347c, 

362c. 

(( 

31. 

77n. 

i( 

24. 

512c 

516n. 

V. 

8. 

193a. 

XII. 

3. 

408b. 

XXXI. 

7. 

383b. 

*^ 

23. 

270a.* 

(( 

6. 

77b,  78n, 

150n. 

11 

19. 

77n. 

11 

24. 

270a.* 

XIII. 

14. 

398a. 

(1 

24. 

397a. 

t( 

25. 

21 2b. 

XIV. 

1. 

655b.* 

It 

26- 

30. 

91.* 

i* 

26. 

212b. 

551b. 

u 

8. 

655b.* 

(1 

30. 

77n. 

V. 

1. 

212b,* 

567b.* 

(( 

13. 

76bc, 

*  77b. 

(1 

36- 

42. 

91c.* 

n 

2. 

549b. 

(t 

14. 

G08c. 

It 

41. 

383b. 

n. 

2. 

567c.* 

i( 

18- 

20. 

342b. 

II 

47. 

77cn, 

104b. 

48 

754 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


Genesis. 

Exod 

us. 

Exodus. 

XXXI. 

54. 

194b. 

IV. 

16. 

406a. 

XXV.  40.  128b,245a. 

XXXII. 

20. 

177c.* 

(( 

22. 

509a. 

568c. 

XXXIII. 

1. 

101b. 

VII. 

1. 

406a. 

XXVI.    1.  393a.394iU'. 

(( 

19. 

150n.* 

U 

19. 

249b.* 

4. 

393c. 

XXXIV. 

26. 

193b. 

VIII. 

29. 

194b. 

"      19. 

395a. 

XXXV. 

16- 

•18. 

512c. 

X. 

1- 

6. 

429c. 

"      31.  393a,394ac. 

t( 

18. 

513a. 

(( 

14. 

85a. 

"      34. 

362a. 

XXXVI. 

1. 

2r2b. 

u 

17. 

430n.* 

"      36. 

394a. 

XXXVII. 

2. 

212b. 

n 

23. 

550a. 

XXVII.    2. 

395a. 

"• 

5- 

10. 

397a. 

XII. 

15- 

20. 

3115a. 

10. 

S95a. 

sgga." 

(( 

15. 

382b. 

XXVIII.    5. 

394a. 

XXXIX. 

14. 

76bn. 

u 

21. 

249c.* 

"          6. 

394a. 

i( 

17. 

76bn. 

it 

23. 

461b. 

"          8. 

394a. 

XL. 

5- 

-19. 

367a. 

t( 

40. 

370b 

385c.* 

"        15-21. 

395c. 

(( 

15. 

76bD. 

XIII. 

7. 

315a. 

"        1.5. 

394a. 

(( 

32. 

478b. 

(( 

15. 

193b. 

"        21. 

383b. 

XLI. 

1- 

32. 

397a. 

(( 

21. 

347c. 

28. 

393b. 

a 

12. 

76n. 

XIV. 

8. 

103b. 

31. 

393b. 

It 

19. 

195c. 

11 

21. 

103b. 

39. 

394a. 

l( 

25. 

399a.* 

XV. 

1- 

19. 

139a. 

XXIX.  21. 

366a. 

1( 

32. 

399a,*416c,* 

11 

1. 

163c.* 

"       23. 

35411. 

423b.* 

11 

3. 

103b. 

"       36. 

195a. 

(( 

51. 

512c. 

XVI. 

33. 

S63c. 

"       42-46. 

360b.* 

(1 

52. 

512c. 

%i 

34. 

363c. 

"       43.  360c,*363c, 

XLII. 

13. 

89b. 

XIX. 

5. 

364b. 

367bn,*433a. 

(i 

38. 

249c. 

11 

6. 

364b. 

"       45. 

500c. 

XLIII. 

16. 

194a. 

(1 

9. 

141a. 

XXX.    6. 

365a. 

(t 

32. 

76n. 

(C 

16- 

-20. 

450c. 

"       10. 

178a. 

XLV. 

21. 

249a.* 

11 

18. 

106c 

713c. 

"       12. 

178a. 

XLVI. 

3. 

518a. 

11 

20. 

451c. 

"       20.  260b 

,  366a. 

(( 

4. 

518a. 

XX. 

1. 

141a, 

143b. 

"       21. 

366a. 

II 

8. 

518b.* 

11 

2. 

392a. 

XXXI.  18.  141a, 

143b, 

t( 

12. 

519an.* 

11 

5. 

362a. 

360a. 

<i 

15. 

51Sb.* 

11 

8- 

11. 

382b. 

XXXIII.  18. 

396b. 

II 

17. 

519b.* 

11 

11. 

381b. 

20. 

45111. 

II 

21. 

519b,*520n.* 

11 

13. 

165b,=t 

•  193c,* 

XXXIV.    5-7. 

569a.* 

11 

26. 

51911. 

52P    " 

"        26. 

359c. 

11 

27. 

385b 

519a.* 

11 

19. 

U 

•43b. 

27. 

360a. 

XLIX. 

1. 

55.3a. 

XXI. 

2. 

■"^o. 

"        28. 

383b. 

11 

6. 

189b,*  193b. 

il 

U. 

J. 

XXXV.    6. 

.S93a. 

ii 

8- 

-12. 

99b.* 

11 

23- 

-25. 

525c.* 

XXXVIII  21. 

491b. 

<i 

9. 

258c 

303n. 

XXII. 

1-4 

333b. 

23. 

383a. 

ti 

10. 

250b.* 

(( 

3. 

333c. 

XXXIX.  22. 

393b. 

(I 

14. 

259c.* 

XXIII. 

14- 

-17. 

389a. 

XL.  22-27. 

364b. 

« 

21. 

259c.* 

il 

19. 

359c. 

II 

22- 

26. 

9».c.* 

u 

20- 

-22. 

612b. 

Leviticus. 

II 

27. 

260a.* 

(1 

21. 

588a. 

II. 

7. 

263b. 

u 

31. 

384b. 

IV. 

6. 

382c. 

Exodus. 

XXIV. 

1. 

88.5b. 

11 

13. 

197b.« 

I.     1-5 

516n, 

519n.* 

a 

4. 

3S3b. 

11 

22. 

197b. 

"      3. 

76n. 

(( 

9. 

385b. 

11 

27. 

197b. 

"       5. 

385b 

,  519a. 

(( 

16. 

451c. 

V. 

2. 

197  b. 

"      7. 

76n. 

u 

17. 

451c. 

(( 

3. 

197b. 

"    15. 

79n. 

t( 

28. 

385b. 

<( 

4. 

197b. 

"    It;. 

475c. 

XXV. 

4. 

893a. 

i( 

17. 

197b. 

"    19. 

76n. 

11 

16. 

360a. 

(( 

19. 

197).. 

II.     «. 

76n. 

11 

17- 

-22. 

178b. 

VI. 

26. 

195a. 

"11.     2. 

347c. 

11 

17. 

362h.* 

VII. 

9. 

26Sb. 

"        5. 

106c. 

11 

21. 

360a 

362a.* 

IX. 

15. 

19.5a. 

"        6. 

381b. 

it 

22. 

362b.* 

XI. 

7-13. 

163c 

IV.  10. 

88c. 

11 

31-40. 

350b. 

11 

15-16. 

163c. 

INDEX  TO  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


755 


Leviticus. 

IVumbers. 

Deuteronomy. 

XI.  22. 

309a. 

XIII. 

1- 

-16. 

51 6n. 

XVIII.   Ii3- 

19. 

57<tb. 

XII.     2. 

382b. 

(( 

25. 

387a. 

XIX.  21. 

526a. 

3. 

382b. 

XIV. 

2^. 

387a.* 

XXI.   15. 

225c. 

XIV.     6. 

260b 

,  381b. 

U 

33. 

386ac, 

*387a.* 

XXII.     1- 

3. 

569b. 

7. 

260b 

, 382b. 

XV. 

27. 

197c. 

9. 

87211. 

"        8. 

382c. 

(( 

37- 

■41. 

393c. 

XXIII.   12- 

14. 

872i:. 

«'       51. 

260c 

,  382e. 

XVI. 

32. 

251b.* 

XXIV.     4. 

81c. 

"       52. 

195a. 

XVII. 

10. 

863c. 

7. 

58nh. 

XV.  13. 

382c. 

XIX. 

6. 

381b. 

XXV.     3. 

,885b. 

"      24. 

S82c. 

(( 

11. 

382c. 

XXVI.   13. 

196c. 

XVI.     2-6. 

366b.* 

(1 

18. 

260c. 

XXVIII.     5. 

250a.* 

"      2. 

362b.* 

(t 

19. 

260c. 

"         20. 

195c. 

"    11-17. 

362a. 

XXI. 

4- 

-9. 

341a.* 

63. 

604!). 

"    12. 

3G6a. 

(( 

14. 

501a. 

64. 

6041). 

"    12-16. 

366b.* 

(( 

17. 

102e. 

68. 

392a. 

"    27. 

382c. 

a 

25. 

86b. 

XXX.     6. 

271c. 

XVII.  11. 

178a 

,  339a, 

XXII. 

38. 

143a. 

XXXI.  26. 

863c. 

358an. 

XXIII. 

7. 

265b. 

XXXII.     2. 

60811.* 

XIX.  10. 

569b. 

tt 

21. 

196b. 

35. 

627b.* 

"      17. 

569b. 

a 

26. 

143a. 

"         89. 

193a. 

"       18. 

569b 

,581a. 

XXIV. 

3. 

401b. 

40. 

259b.* 

"       19. 

372n. 

(( 

4. 

401b. 

41. 

251a.* 

"       32. 

249b.* 

(< 

7. 

306a. 

42. 

259c,*  262b.* 

XXI.    7-15 

376b. 

(C 

8. 

265b. 

51. 

196b. 

XXIII.  15. 

382b. 

tc 

13. 

143a. 

XXXIV.  12. 

396b. 

"       24. 

382b. 

a 

14. 

553a. 

"       27.  , 

178a. 

u 

17. 

169b. 

Joshua. 

"       28. " 

178a. 

u 

17- 

-24. 

409a.* 

I.      1. 

670b. 

XXIV.     5-9. 

S64b.* 

u 

21. 

260a. 

"      5. 

85a. 

5. 

383c. 

u 

24. 

409b. 

II.     9. 

884b. 

6. 

864n. 

XXVI. 

40. 

519b.* 

"     24. 

384b. 

20. 

526a. 

XXVII. 

8- 

11. 

523b. 

III.     7. 

470b. 

XXV.     8. 

382c. 

XXXII. 

40. 

520c.* 

IV.     1. 

5701). 

"         40. 

580c. 

(I 

41. 

520c.* 

V.   13. 

205c,* 

570h. 

44. 

580b. 

XXXIV. 

17- 

28. 

516n. 

"     14. 

20f,c. 

"         45. 

580b. 

XXXV. 

9- 

34. 

339a. 

VI.     2. 

384b. 

54. 

580c. 

11 

27- 

■30. 

193c. 

"        5. 

205c. 

XXVI.  12. 

500c. 

tl 

31- 

34. 

528b. 

"      13-15 

382c 

,  384a. 

"        26. 

383b. 

VII.     1. 

196a. 

Deuteronomy 

. 

'■     11. 

196c. 

IVumbers. 

II.   25 

543b. 

"     15. 

19Gc. 

I.     5-15. 

516n. 

IV.   13 

360a 

, 383b. 

"     24-26. 

877n. 

"   20-t7. 

51611. 

"      15 

451c. 

X.  12-14. 

540.* 

III.   16. 

249a.* 

'•      19 

543b. 

'•     13. 

501a, 

540bn. 

IV.     6. 

393c. 

V.     4 

141a. 

"    26. 

192b. 

"       7. 

393c. 

"    17 

193c.* 

XI.     6. 

189c. 

8. 

394a. 

.   "    22 

141a. 

"       9. 

189c. 

"     11. 

393c. 

VI.     4 

380c 

,  587c. 

"     17. 

192b. 

"      12 

« 

393c. 

6 

569b.* 

XV.  20-62. 

524a. 

"      13*. 

S94a. 

VIII.     3 

254c. 

XVII.   11. 

86b. 

V.  12. 

196a. 

7 

-9. 

287n. 

XXII.  14. 

383b. 

VI.     5. 

262b. 

IX.     9 

860a. 

"       16. 

196b. 

"      24-26. 

381b 

587a. 

X.     4 

383b. 

"       20. 

190a. 

"      27. 

,S81b. 

"    22 

385b, 

519an. 

VII.  87. 

3S3c. 

XII.  23 

359a. 

Judges. 

XI.  15. 

122a. 

XIII.     1 

-5. 

372n. 

II.   20. 

19C,c. 

"      24. 

385b. 

6 

-11 

225b. 

V.     2. 

262a.*  2631.. 

"      29. 

431a. 

XIV.     8 

, 

372n. 

•'     14. 

260a. 

XII.     6.  143a, 

206a 

396a.* 

XV.  12 

, 

76ii. 

"    20. 

179b 

541a. 

7.  215b, 

343b 

396a.* 

XVII.     6 

249a.* 

"     21. 

106b. 

"        8. 

271a, 

396a.* 

XVIII. 

15. 

339b. 

"    26. 

101b. 

75G 


INDEX  TO  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


Judges. 

2  Samuel. 

3  Kings. 

V. 

27. 

101b. 

I.   23. 

263b. 

VIII.   22. 

19Cc. 

VI. 

36-40. 

340a.* 

II.      1. 

87c. 

"        26. 

515a. 

VII. 

12. 

253a.* 

"    10. 

515ab. 

X.     1- 

7. 

377b. 

11 

13-16. 

397a. 

"    11. 

515b. 

"      7. 

194  b. 

VIII. 

17. 

193ab. 

V.     4. 

515a. 

"      9. 

193a. 

tl 

21. 

193b. 

VII.    4-17 

399b 

.*570c. 

"    14. 

194b. 

(t 

26. 

393c. 

"       18. 

399c. 

XIV.     9. 

266c.* 

IX. 

7-20. 

266a.* 

VIII.     4. 

189c, 

525a.* 

XV.  10. 

192c. 

Li 

28. 

150n. 

"      17. 

605a. 

"      14. 

192c. 

n 

54. 

193a. 

XII.     1-4. 

278a, 

*  292a. 

XVIII.  12. 

196c. 

XI. 

30-40. 

206a.* 

"      15. 

187a. 

26. 

77b, 

107ac. 

XII. 

6. 

194c. 

XIV.     4-7. 

292b. 

XIX.  16. 

103b. 

(I 

7. 

261a.* 

XVI.     1. 

349c. 

XXIV.     2. 

107u. 

XIV. 

8-9 

268c. 

XVIII.  15. 

192c. 

14. 

274c. 

11 

14. 

268c.* 

33. 

252b. 

"        15. 

274c. 

II 

18. 

100b. 

XXI.  20. 

416a. 

"       17. 

275a. 

XVII. 

10. 

388c.* 

XXII.   16. 

106c. 

XXV.     4. 

107u. 

XX. 

16. 

194c. 

XXIII.     1. 

190a. 

5. 

107n. 

11 

32. 

179b. 

2. 

399c 

.  566c. 

"       10. 

107n. 

Ruth. 

"        21. 

193a. 

"       13. 

107u. 

IV. 

2. 

383b. 

XXIV.  16. 

461b. 

1  Chronicles. 

1  Samuel. 

1  Kings. 

I.  17- 

-27. 

500b. 

I. 

3. 

389a. 

I.     1. 

88a. 

II.     7. 

196b. 

u 

1. 

389a. 

II.  32. 

193a. 

"    21. 

620c.* 

(1 

8. 

383b. 

"     44. 

196a. 

"    22. 

520c.* 

(1 

9. 

359c. 

III.     1. 

326a. 

"    55. 

605a. 

<1 

19. 

513a. 

"       5. 

397a. 

III.  19. 

*» 

523b. 

<l 

20. 

513a. 

IV.     3. 

605a. 

"     24. 

623b. 

II. 

6. 

193a. 

"     13. 

520c. 

V.   11- 

17. 

517a. 

a 

19,        888c,  389a.* 

VI.     3. 

354b. 

VIII.     1. 

517b. 

a 

36. 

364n. 

"     20. 

361c. 

"         3. 

520a. 

III. 

1. 

670b. 

VII.  15. 

525a.* 

5. 

620a. 

a 

3. 

369c. 

IX.     2. 

397a. 

IX.   24. 

382a. 

IV. 

6. 

76n. 

X.     1. 

268b. 

XVII.  25. 

103b.* 

ti 

9. 

70n. 

XI.  29-31 

334c. 

XVIII.     4. 

189c 

525a.* 

VI. 

18. 

177c.* 

"     41- 

138n 

,  501a. 

XXVII.  25. 

177c.* 

X. 

3-6. 

407b. 

XII.  19. 

196c. 

XXVIII.    11. 

245a 

,  362c. 

11 

5. 

570b. 

XIII.     1. 

400a. 

12. 

245a. 

t( 

9-12. 

404a. 

XIV.  21. 

615a. 

XXIX.  29. 

13811. 

II 

10-12. 

328c.* 

"       29. 

138n. 

3  Chronicles 

XI. 

15. 

194b. 

XV.  31. 

138n. 

TIT    1 5 

fi'^.'in  * 

XIII. 

1. 

515a.* 

XVIII.  10. 

543b. 

V.  12. 

i^Mllll. 

394  a. 

t( 

3. 

76n. 

21. 

88a. 

VII.     4. 

104  b. 

(( 

7. 

76n. 

27. 

253c. 

IX.  11. 

17S»b. 

XV. 

23. 

195b. 

40. 

194b. 

XII.  15. 

501b. 

u 

24. 

196c. 

XIX.     1. 

193b. 

XX.     1- 

13. 

430a. 

XVII. 
XIX. 

50. 
20. 

192c. 
570b. 

8. 
"      10. 

385b. 
193b. 

"      20- 
"       30. 

26. 

331c. 
431c. 

It 

23. 

404a. 

"      19-21. 

87c. 

XXI.  10. 

190c. 

a 

24. 

404a. 

XX.  38-40. 

292b. 

"       19. 

388c, 

3801).* 

XXII. 
XXIV. 

18. 
13. 

192c. 
329c. 

XXII.  42. 

515a. 

XXIV.  21. 

25. 

XXIX.     (). 

288c. 
103a. 
190b. 

XXV. 

11. 

194a. 

3  Kings. 

XXVI. 

12. 

89n. 

I.      1. 

190c. 

XXXII.  32. 

138n. 

17. 

85c. 

II.     9-12. 

448a. 

XXXIII.  17. 

1941). 

ti 

18. 

85c. 

III.  7. 

IV.  7-9. 

190c. 
406a. 

XXXVI.   10. 

288c. 

2  Samuel. 

V.     7. 

193a. 

Ezra. 

I. 

12-15. 

540c. 

VI.  17. 

448a.* 

II.     1-70. 

52.M).* 

It 

18. 

540c. 

VIII.  20. 

196c. 

"    64. 

525b. 

INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


757 


Ezra. 

Job. 

Psalms. 

IV. 

7. 

107a 

108n. 

XXXIII. 

14- 

-17. 

396n. 

XXXVII.  12. 

197a. 

u 

8.      107n, 

llObn. 

XXXIV. 

6. 

187a  *  248c.* 

"         14. 

194a. 

(( 

11. 

Ilia. 

(I 

29. 

197a.* 

"         21. 

197u. 

V. 

4. 

11  On. 

(( 

37. 

197a. 

XLII.  ^7. 

500b. 

VI. 

18.     107n, 

llObn. 

XXXV. 

10. 

190a. 

XLV.    1. 

263b.* 

VII. 

1-10. 

109c. 

XXXVII. 

3. 

543b.* 

8. 

lOln. 

10. 

604b. 

XXXIX. 

27. 

260b. 

XLVI.    9. 

251a.* 

u 

12-26. 

107n 

,  110c. 

XLIX.    4. 

2n8b. 

u 

12. 

375b. 

Psalms. 

L.     1. 

539  b 

VIII. 

16. 

605a. 

I. 

1. 

85t 

,  86b,* 

LI.    7.1 

!60b,*  593b. 

X. 

2-10. 

196a. 

98c 

197a. 

"    10. 

271c. 

a 

2. 

98b 

604c. 

LVII.    3. 

375a. 

IVebemiah. 

II. 

2. 

399c,=t 

•479n.* 

5- 

11. 

549b. 

I. 

1. 

424b. 

(I 

6. 

339b 

399c.* 

LXVI.    3. 

88b. 

VII. 

6-73. 

525b.* 

III. 

1. 

234a. 

LXVIII.  15. 

89n. 

ti 

65. 

525b. 

u 

2. 

234a. 

"       16. 

86a. 

VIII. 

1-8. 

110a 

,  604c. 

(( 

4. 

234b. 

"       26. 

306a. 

t( 

1-15. 

605b. 

a 

5. 

233c.* 

LXIX.    1. 

349a. 

(1 

8. 

108a. 

a 

6. 

234a. 

2. 

349a. 

IX. 

29. 

260a. 

IV. 

6. 

234b. 

LXXI.  13. 

196a. 

X. 

28. 

605c. 

a 

7. 

234b. 

LXXII.    1. 

289c. 

XIII. 

13. 

605c. 

VI. 

6. 

253b. 

10. 

100c. 

i4 

24. 

113a. 

VII. 

8. 

234c. 

LXXVII.    9. 

375a. 

11 

10. 

375a. 

LXXVIII.    2. 

268b, 

512b.* 

Esther. 

X. 

7. 

195c. 

10. 

96c. 

I. 

2. 

424b. 

XII. 

2. 

375a. 

47. 

193c.* 

u 

3.' 

424b. 

a 

6. 

384a. 

68. 

106c. 

t( 

14. 

424b. 

XV. 

3. 

196a. 

LXXIX.  12. 

384a. 

11 

18. 

424b. 

XVI. 

4. 

189c.* 

LXXX.    8- 

15. 

303a,* 

II 

19. 

424b. 

u 

8- 

11. 

630b.* 

321a. 

VIII. 

15. 

394a. 

XVII. 

15. 

571a. 

"        10. 

89n. 

IX. 

6. 

193b. 

XVIII. 

2. 

248b. 

XC.    2. 

88b 

496b. 

a 

10. 

193b. 

a 

6- 

15. 

185b.* 

"       3. 

89n. 

u 

12. 

193b. 

a 

9. 

541a. 

"       4. 

88b 

496a. 

11 

15. 

193a. 

40. 
41. 

661n. 
661n. 

"     13. 
XCI.    1. 

101c. 
368n. 

Job. 

XIX. 

2. 

96c. 

"     11. 

571a. 

IV.  12- 

21. 

94n.* 

a 

3. 

lOlc* 

"     14. 

97a. 

V.     2. 

193b. 

a 

4-6. 

539bc.* 

XGII.  12- 

14. 

306c. 

"     24. 

195a.* 

a 

4. 

lOlc* 

XCIII.    3. 

86a,  96b. 

VI.     4. 

249a.* 

XX. 

9. 

95c. 

XCV.    2. 

190a. 

"       5. 

96c. 

XXI. 

11. 

196a. 

XCVIII.    8. 

86a. 

"       9. 

lOln. 

XXII. 

3. 

365a. 

CII.    6. 

255b.* 

"     24. 

197c. 

XXIII. 

5. 

249c, 

*677a. 

CIV.    2. 

184a. 

[X.     6. 

259b.* 

XXIV. 

2. 

96c. 

4. 

3.")nc. 

"     28. 

189c. 

a 

3. 

366a. 

"      16. 

80n. 

SI.     7. 

253a. 

11 

4. 

366a. 

CVII.    3. 

382a. 

XII.     1. 

253c. 

XXV. 

8. 

89a. 

CXIII.    4- 

6. 

549b. 

XIII.  15. 

192a. 

XXVI. 

6. 

260b.* 

CXIV.    3. 

86a 

,251c.* 

XV.  35. 

195c. 

XXVII. 

1. 

98a. 

4. 

86a 

,  251c.* 

XVIII.  13. 

96b. 

(I 

5. 

368n. 

5. 

252a.* 

XIX.     3. 

383b. 

XXVIII. 

4. 

195c. 

6. 

86a 

05.).,  * 

"       25- 

27. 

219c. 

XXIX. 

6. 

541a. 

541 

a. 

"       27. 

367n. 

XXX. 

5. 

97b. 

CXIX.  34. 

604c. 

XX.     4. 

253a. 

XXXI. 

20. 

36Sii. 

"       35. 

604c. 

"      16. 

193b. 

XXXII. 

5. 

195b. 

"       54. 

190a. 

XXIV.  14. 

192a. 

XXXIV. 

7. 

571a. 

"       61. 

197a. 

XXVI.     8. 

259b.* 

XXXV. 

4. 

196a. 

"       97. 

604.-. 

XXVII.     1. 

265b. 

ii 

26. 

98b. 

"     105. 

22b. 

XXVIII.  12- 

-28. 

612b. 

i( 

27. 

98b. 

"     111. 

22b. 

XXIX.     1. 

265b. 

XXXVI. 

6. 

89n. 

CXXV.    2. 

106b. 

758 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


Psalms. 

Proverbs. 

Isaiah. 

CXXXII. 

9. 

394b. 

XXV.  22. 

527b.* 

I. 

25. 

lOln. 

CXXXVIII. 

8. 

375b. 

U 

27. 

331b.* 

(( 

29. 

lOln. 

CXXXIX. 

14. 

327c. 

XXVI.    4. 

333a.* 

(( 

30. 

255a.* 

H 

19. 

192a. 

U 

5. 

333a.* 

II. 

1-4. 

416a. 

CXLI. 

2. 

365a. 

ti 

8. 

330b.* 

U 

2. 

553a. 

CXLVI. 

6. 

381b. 

It 

9. 

330b.* 

1( 

4. 

250b.* 

CXLVII. 

3. 

189c. 

it 

10. 

269c,* 

270c. 

IV. 

4. 

384a. 

H 

13. 

309a. 

V. 

1- 

-6. 

286c,* 

Proverbs. 

U 

16. 

384a. 

304a 

I.   1-e 

. 

211a. 

XXIX.  13. 

223c.* 

(( 

7. 

287a. 

"    1. 

265b. 

XXX      1. 

332a. 

VI. 

1^. 

469c. 

"     6. 

268b. 

II 

15. 

268a 

331c.* 

11 

1- 

8. 

417a. 

"   1. 

157b. 

u 

25-28 

, 

268a. 

11 

3. 

381c 

587a. 

"  20. 

330b. 

XXXI.    1. 

332a. 

II 

9. 

278c 

511c. 

"  24-27.    95b 

*  96b. 

II 

10. 

278c, 

511c, 

III.    4. 

505b. 

Ecclesiastes. 

603b 

"       5. 

331b. 

I. 

2. 

211a. 

VII. 

8. 

887c.* 

IV.  14. 

331b. 

u 

14. 

196b. 

a 

14. 

494c.* 

573c. 

V.  15-18.304b, 

*330b. 

II. 

8. 

808c. 

it 

14- 

16. 

494b. 

"    19. 

305a. 

(( 

11. 

196b. 

VIII. 

3. 

376b. 

"    22. 

197b. 

(( 

17. 

19Gb. 

t( 

6. 

106b. 

VI.    1. 

lOln. 

t  ( 

19. 

196b. 

u 

7. 

349a. 

"       2. 

96b. 

IV. 

12. 

381b, 

587b. 

(I 

8. 

349a. 

"      6. 

268a. 

VII. 

19. 

383b. 

a 

18. 

376c. 

"    29. 

333b. 

IX. 

13-18. 

330b.* 

IX. 

1- 

7. 

574ii. 

"    30. 

333a.* 

11 

14. 

292b.* 

It 

5. 

394c. 

"    31. 

333a.* 

a 

15. 

292b.* 

X. 

1. 

196b. 

"    32-85. 

333b. 

11 

16. 

292c.* 

u 

5. 

35Ga.* 

VIII.     1. 

330b. 

11 

17. 

♦ 

292c. 

(( 

6. 

101a. 

'•      35. 

194c.* 

ll 

18. 

292c. 

XI. 

1. 

275b. 

"      36. 

194c.* 

X. 

2. 

383c.* 

ii 

1- 

-10. 

574a. 

IX.    1. 

330b. 

XII. 

1. 

307b.* 

a 

4. 

469a. 

"      2. 

194a. 

ti 

3. 

251a.* 

tt 

8. 

413b. 

X.    1. 

265b. 

it 

3-7. 

306b.* 

a 

9. 

413b. 

"      7. 

95c.* 

ti 

12. 

3S2a. 

"      8. 

95c.* 

Song  of  Solomon. 

XII. 

3. 

501a. 

"    10. 

180c 

,  189c. 

I. 

12-14. 

327b.* 

XIII. 

2- 

13.  413c,  414,* 

XL  25. 

332b.* 

u 

14. 

177c.* 

44  6n. 

"    31. 

505b. 

II. 

1. 

106c. 

11 

9. 

127a. 

XII.  19. 

249a.* 

a 

4. 

825a.* 

11 

10. 

127a, 

446a. 

"    24. 

332b. 

u 

8. 

325a.* 

II 

17. 

414c, 

422b. 

XIV.  34. 

97b. 

a 

9. 

255b.* 

II 

19. 

107n, 

414c. 

XV.    2. 

97b. 

(( 

11. 

325b. 

11 

19- 

22. 

483a. 

"      13. 

189c. 

(t 

12. 106b,189c*325b. 

XIV. 

4. 

265b. 

XVI.    7. 

332c.* 

(( 

16. 

255b. 

(( 

9- 

20. 

252b. 

"      13. 

332c.* 

IV. 

1-5. 

255b. 

XV. 

1. 

9  Gb. 

"      31. 

306c. 

u 

1. 

325b. 

XVI. 

9. 

349c. 

XVII.    7. 

249b. 

a 

8. 

826a. 

it 

14. 

387c. 

XVIII.    4. 

501a. 

V. 

10-16. 

327c.* 

XVII. 

11. 

187a. 

XIX.    2. 

194c.* 

VI. 

8. 

325b. 

XX. 

2-4.  840b 

,  373c. 

XX.    1. 

88a. 

VII. 

2-6. 

328a.* 

<l 

3. 

876b. 

"     11. 

331b. 

XXI. 

2. 

422b. 

XXII.    2. 

223c.* 

Isaiah. 

II 

9. 

483a. 

8. 

195c. 

I. 

3. 

86b,  97b. 

XXII. 

1. 

4(ir'l). 

'•       13. 

309a. 

11 

8. 

2r)5a.* 

(. 

13. 

i*i;jb.* 

"      20. 

641n.* 

11 

9. 

100c 

391a. 

II 

22. 

2.")nli.* 

"      21. 

641n.* 

(t 

10. 

391a. 

XXIII. 

1. 

4(i'.tli. 

XXIV.    5. 

89a. 

11 

16. 

195c. 

XXIV. 

5. 

196c. 

XXV.    1. 

265b. 

il 

19. 

97c. 

il 

16. 

1 90a. 

"      15. 

249b. 

^l 

20. 

97c. 

a 

19- 

-23. 

127a. 

"      21. 

527b.* 

<i 

21. 

478n. 

XXV. 

5. 

190a. 

INDEX  TO  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


759 


Isaiab. 

Isaiah. 

Jeremiali. 

XXVI. 

19. 

575a. 

LV.  11. 

254b. 

XXV.  27- 

31. 

375c. 

XXVII. 

1. 

392c.-'^ 

"     12. 

541a. 

31. 

543b. 

XXVIII. 

18, 

177c. 

LVIL    5. 

194b. 

"       32. 

543b. 

XXIX. 

1. 

392b.* 

"       15. 

574a. 

XXVII.    1- 

-14. 

340b, 

n 

2. 

392b.* 

"       20. 

197a.* 

373 

c. 

it. 

4. 

308c. 

LIX.  17. 

316c 

317a. 

3. 

434b. 

a 

7. 

392b.* 

LX.    1-3. 

501a. 

XXVIIL  10- 

17. 

340b. 

u 

8. 

255a.* 

LXII.  10. 

179b. 

XXX.    9. 

392b. 

XXX. 

4. 

489n. 

LXIV.    4. 

157c. 

12. 

187a. 

XXXI. 

9. 

392c. 

LXV.  17. 

488c 

489n.* 

15. 

187a. 

XXXII. 

10. 

388c 

389b.* 

"       18. 

490n. 

XXXL    1. 

500c. 

XXXIV. 

1- 

10. 

127a. 

"      25. 

413b. 

9. 

500c 

509a. 

(( 

3. 

541a. 

LXVL    3. 

195b. 

"        15. 

512c,*  5 13n.* 

u 

4. 

446b.* 

7. 

475b. 

"       18. 

512c. 

(( 

5. 

446b.* 

"        8. 

475b. 

"       20. 

512c. 

tl 

5- 

10. 

494c, 

"      22. 

489n.* 

"       33. 

500c. 

495a. 

"       23. 

543b. 

XXXII.    3. 

288c. 

11 

6. 

81c. 

"      24. 

488c. 

4. 

107n. 

XXXV. 

2. 

106c. 

"           5. 

107n. 

n 

3. 

97a. 

Jeremiah. 

24. 

107n. 

u 

10. 

490n. 

I.    9. 

138a. 

"         38. 

600c. 

XXXVI. 

11. 

107a. 

"  11. 

348a,* 

356b. 

XXXVL  30. 

523b. 

XL. 

3. 

179b. 

"  12. 

348b. 

XXXVIL    5. 

107n. 

tt 

11. 

201c, 

202b.* 

"  13. 

349a.* 

8. 

107n. 

»           <( 

30. 

307a. 

"  14. 

349a.* 

9. 

107ii. 

it 

31. 

307a. 

'^  15. 

349a.* 

XL.    1. 

613a. 

XLI. 

4. 

469a. 

n.  13. 

259a.* 

XLin.    8- 

13. 

340b, 

a 

29. 

195b. 

"    20. 

478n. 

373c. 

XLIII. 

14. 

107n. 

III.    3-6. 

478n. 

XLIV.  22. 

195c. 

XLIV. 

3. 

lOln 

501a. 

IV.    4. 

271c. 

XLVI.  22. 

608b.* 

(( 

6. 

469a. 

"     30. 

478n. 

XLVIL    6. 

252b.* 

(( 

23. 

86a. 

V.  21. 

603b. 

XLIX.    7- 

22. 

416b. 

XLV. 

1. 

146b. 

VIL  12. 

196a. 

16. 

260b. 

XLVI. 

11. 

85a. 

"     24. 

196a. 

36. 

355c 

382a. 

XLVII. 

1. 

107n. 

vin.  7. 

251a.* 

L.    1. 

107ii. 

XLVIII. 

1. 

306a. 

IX.    1. 

253b. 

"     8. 

107n 

483a. 

(( 

12. 

469a. 

X.  IL 

107n, 

108b. 

"  10. 

107n. 

U 

20. 

483a. 

XI.  16. 

335b. 

"  IS. 

10711. 

XLIX. 

2. 

469a. 

"     17. 

335b. 

"  17- 

■20. 

409b. 

U 

3. 

509a. 

XIIL    1-11 

, 

340b. 

"  3.3. 

409b. 

a 

10. 

lOln. 

"      11. 

373c. 

LI.    5. 

409b. 

n 

13. 

102c. 

"       27. 

478n. 

"       6. 

409b 

483a. 

L. 

11. 

373b. 

XTV.    2. 

394b. 

"       8. 

483a. 

LI. 

9. 

102c. 

XV.  16. 

369n. 

"     11. 

422b. 

a 

16. 

489n. 

"     18. 

187a. 

"     28. 

422b, 

LII. 

1. 

102c 

306a. 

XVL    4-6. 

434a. 

"     40. 

194a. 

11 

1- 

12. 

215a.* 

XVII.    9. 

186c.* 

"     45. 

409b. 

It 

10. 

370a. 

"       16. 

187a.* 

a 

11. 

500c. 

XVIIL    1-6. 

340b 

,  373c. 

Lamentations 

. 

(C 

13. 

190a,* 

214c.* 

XIX.     1,  2. 

373c. 

n.  21. 

194a. 

LIII. 

2. 

275b. 

XXI.    4. 

107n. 

(( 

4. 

500c. 

"         9. 

107n. 

Ezekiel. 

il 

6. 

lOln. 

XXII.  30. 

523b. 

L    1.  372a, 

400b,*  432c.* 

LIV. 

1. 

97c. 

XXIIL     1-4. 

320c. 

"    2. 

372a. 

t( 

8. 

97c. 

"          2. 

195c. 

"    3. 

107n, 

400b. 

<( 

8- 

10. 

334c. 

"       14*. 

391a. 

"    4. 

4.34b. 

LV. 

6. 

98c. 

"       29. 

254c.* 

"    4-28. 

469c. 

u 

7. 

98c. 

XXIV.     1-3. 

349b.* 

"    5-14. 

362c. 

tl 

8. 

574a. 

XXV.  11. 

385b. 

"    5. 

363b, 

382a. 

(( 

9. 

674a. 

"       12. 

385b, 

387c. 

"  10. 

363b. 

« 

10. 

254b. 

15-33.375c,*434b. 

"  12. 

107n. 

760 


INDEX  TO  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


Ezekiel. 

I.  13.  107n. 
"  15-21.  355n,  362c. 
"  18.  382a. 
"  20.  3S2a. 
"  26-28.  363a. 
"  26.  396c,  469a. 
"  28.  334c,  373a, 
400b,434b,469a. 


II. 


III. 


IV. 


V. 

^(, 
(( 

VI. 

it 

VII. 

(( 

VIII. 


1. 

2. 

8. 

9. 

3. 
10. 
14. 
15. 

23. 

1-3. 

4-8. 

5. 

6. 

1. 

9-17, 

1-17, 

2. 
10. 

1-7. 

1. 

2. 

7. 
27. 

1. 

3. 


IX. 
X. 


6. 
9-13. 


XI.  13-20. 
"  19. 
"  20. 
XII.  2. 
3-8. 
3-20. 
"   18. 
10-15. 
11-15. 
XVI.  21. 

44-59. 

2-10. 

11-21. 


XIII 


XVII. 


40()b 

40()b. 

369a,  371a. 

371a,  473b. 

369ab,  473b. 

369b.* 

432c. 

372b,  373a, 

433b. 

373a. 
370a.* 
370b.* 
387b.* 
385c,  387b.* 
372c. 
370c.* 
370c.* 
372c,*  471c. 
372a. 
435a. 
382a. 
382a. 
310b. 
250b.* 
372a,  372b,* 
433c. 

372b,  400b, 
401b. 

193b,  354b. 
355n. 
432c. 
271c. 
500c. 
511c,  603b. 
373b. 
340b. 
373b. 
310a.* 
256b. 
194b. 
391a.* 
274a.* 
274b. 


22-24.  274b,  275b,* 
432c. 


XIX.     1-9. 

"      10-14. 

XX.  27. 

"     28. 

"     48. 

XXI.    4. 

='        6. 

1. 


310n. 
310n. 
196b. 
194b. 
543b. 
543b. 
340b,  373b. 
340b. 


Ezekiel. 

XXI.  10.  194a. 

"      26.  250b.* 

XXIII.  29.  249b.* 

XXIV.  3-12..  373c.* 
"       15-27.  340b. 

16-18.  373b. 

XXIX.  11.  38ob. 

12.  385b. 

XXXII.    2.  255b. 

7.  446a. 

XXXIII.  21.  434c. 

XXXIV.  23.  392b.* 
24.  392b.* 

XXXVI.     1-15.  435a. 

16-88.  435a. 

"         28.  500c. 

XXXVII.     1-14.  349c,* 
436a,  575a. 

9.  382a. 

"  15-28.  435a. 

"  24.  392b. 

27.  500c. 

XXXVIII.     1-1.3.  435b.* 

24-23.  536b.* 

XXXIX.     1-16.  435b.* 

"         17-29.  435b.* 

23.  196b. 

XL.     2.  436a. 

XLIII.    2.  469a. 

XLIV.  20.  262b. 

XLVIII.  35.  574e. 


I. 
II. 


Daniel. 

4.         107cn,  lOSan. 
2-5.  107n. 

4.    107an,108a,109a. 
4-7.  107n. 

10.  107n. 

19.  397a. 

20.  Ilia. 
31-45.  352b,*  418b.* 

32.  113c,  395b. 

33.  395b,  421b. 

34.  421b,  447a. 

36.  447a. 
36-45.       422c. 

37.  395b,  422a. 

38.  113c,  353a,  395b, 

422ac. 

39.  424c,*  425a. 

40.  396c,  420c,*  423b. 


III. 

11 

IV. 


41. 
42. 
43. 
44. 

8. 
19. 
25. 

7. 

10-14. 
16. 


415c,' 


384a, 


415c.* 

423a. 

423a. 

421b.* 

lllc* 

478a. 

112a. 

107n. 

112b.* 

388a. 


VI. 

II 


VII. 

II 
(1 
(I 
u 
t( 
II 


Daniel. 

IV.  32.  388a. 
V.  7.  107n,  394a. 
"  11.  10711. 
"  30.  108n,  422a, 
31.  419b,  422a,  423c- 

1.  424a. 

2.  422a. 

3.  422a. 
26.  422b,  424a. 
26.         424a. 

1-8.        35oa.* 

1.  422a,  397a,  401a. 

2.  382a. 

3.  409c,*  418b.*- 

4.  113c,  476a. 
6.    411n,*424c.* 

6.  411n,*425a, 
426a,  476a. 

7.  383b,*  410c.* 
426a. 

8.  410bc,*426a, 
460b,  596n. 

9.  396c,  469a,  574b. 
9-12.       426b.* 
9-14.       460b.  ' 

10.  426b,  574b. 

11.  426b,  461b,  483c. 

13.  396c,  444n,  446c.*- 

14.  444n. 
17.  353a. 
17-27.       422c. 

22.  484b. 

23.  353a,  423b. 

24.  336a,  363a,  383b,* 
426a. 

24-26.       460n. 

25.  384b,*  386a, 
389b,  445b,  460b, 
474a,  596n. 

26.  426b. 

27.  457a.* 

28.  107n,  388a.* 
1-12.      417b. 

1.  422b. 

2.  424b. 
8.         41  In.* 
4.         41111.* 

8.  353a,  382a,  41  la,* 
425c,  426a.* 

9.  410bc,*426c,* 
42Ga.* 

9-12.  460b,  596n. 
14.    384c,*  386b.* 

17.  400c.* 

18.  400c.* 

20.  353b,*  423e, 
424a,*  426c. 

21.  336a,  353b,* 
422b,  423a. 

21-23.      425c.» 

22.  363a. 


VIII. 


(C 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


761 


Oaniel. 

Joel. 

Haggai. 

mi.  23-25. 

460n, 

596n. 

I.  1 

429c.* 

II. 

6. 

489b.* 

IX.  1. 

108n 

422a, 

"  1 

-12. 

429c.* 

11 

7. 

489b,*  490an. 

424a 

"  4 

429c. 

U 

9. 

490a,  575a. 

"   2. 

385b, 

388ac. 

"  13 

-20. 

430a.* 

"   4-19. 

189a. 

II.  1- 

-11.  430b,* 

471c. 

Zechariah. 

"  21. 

401a. 

"   8 

179b. 

I. 

4. 

196a. 

"  24-2*7. 

888b.* 

"  10 

446a. 

u 

8- 

11.     355bc. 

"  24. 

385b. 

"  12 

-27. 

430c.* 

(( 

8. 

894c,  430a. 

"  26. 

474b. 

"  12 

572b. 

u 

10. 

853b,*  43;5a. 

"  27. 

384c, 

574b. 

"  27 

429c. 

u 

11. 

353b.* 

X.  2-3. 

388b. 

"  28 

429c, 

472b. 

li 

18. 

353c,*  430a. 

'"   5. 

469a. 

"  28 

-32. 

431a.* 

'' 

19. 

353c,*  433a. 

"   6. 

469a. 

"  80 

451a.* 

a 

20. 

354a.* 

"  14. 

553a. 

"  81 

806b,  446a 

451a.* 

u 

21. 

354a,*  433a. 

XI.  3. 

425a.* 

"  32 

572b. 

II. 

6. 

382a,  488a. 

"   6. 

428a. 

III.  1 

-17. 

481b.* 

a 

7. 

483a. 

"   7. 

474a. 

"   2 

-14. 

482c. 

III. 

1. 

351a. 

"  21. 

423ab,* 

460n. 

"  14 

450n. 

IV. 

2. 

350b,  469b. 

"  36. 

460b. 

"  18 

-21. 

431c.* 

u 

2- 

14.      350b.* 

"  36-38. 

460n, 

569n. 

"  21 

429c. 

u 

8. 

835b,*  417c. 

XII.  2. 

574c,* 

575a. 

u 

14. 

385b,  417c. 

"   3. 

574c.* 

Amos. 

V. 

1-4.       354b.* 

"   7. 

384b,* 

886a, 

V. 

2. 

373b. 

a 

6. 

3.54b.* 

445b. 

"  21. 

572c.* 

it 

8. 

354b,*  354n. 

"  11. 

385a,*  386b. 

"  22. 

572c.* 

a 

11. 

355a. 

889c. 

VII. 

9. 

249a. 

VI. 

1- 

7.       417b. 

"  12. 

386b 

389c. 

VIII. 

1. 

349c.* 

u 

1- 

8.  355b,*  430a.  V 

u 

3. 

349c.* 

u 

2. 

470a. 

Hosea. 

u 

5. 

354c. 

(1 

3. 

394b,  470a. 

I.  1. 

878a. 

IX.  13. 

541a. 

(( 

5. 

882a,  433a. 

"  2. 

249c,* 

378c,* 

ii 

9- 

15.      840c. 

376c. 

Obadiah. 

VII. 

11. 

260a.* 

"  3. 

374c.* 

4. 

260b. 

VIII. 

8. 

500c. 

"  10. 

877b. 

9. 

192b.* 

IX. 

10. 

379c. 

"  11. 

377b. 

X. 

2. 

195b. 

II.  1. 

377b. 

Jonab. 

u 

11. 

250b.* 

"   2. 

377c. 

I. 

9. 

76n. 

XI. 

1. 

102c. 

"  14. 

377c. 

"  16. 

194b. 

(k 

2. 

102c. 

"  15. 

377cn.* 

II. 

3. 

500b. 

1( 

4- 

-17.      320c. 

"  22. 

377c. 

III. 

4. 

388a. 

11 

4- 

-14.      375c.* 

"  23. 

377c. 

u 

4. 

402a. 

III.  1. 

373c,*  378a.* 

Micah. 

11 

10- 

-14.      402a. 

"   2. 

378a.* 

I. 

4. 

541a. 

u 

13. 

254a.* 

"   5. 

392b. 

il 

9. 

187a. 

XII. 

10. 

468b. 

IV.  16. 

260a. 

II. 

4. 

265b. 

u 

11. 

447c. 

VI.  6. 

193b. 

IV. 

1. 

275c. 

(( 

12. 

447c,  468n. 

"   7. 

196c. 

u 

1-3. 

416b. 

XIII. 

7. 

102c. 

VIII.  1. 

196c. 

u 

2. 

275c. 

XIV. 

16. 

339a. 

"   13. 

392a.* 

VI. 

6-8. 

573b.* 

IX.  3. 

392a.* 

VII. 

6. 

225a.* 

] 

Ualachi. 

"   7. 

406a. 

I 

1. 

575a. 

"  15. 

195c. 

Nahum. 

l( 

2 

225c. 

"  16. 

193a. 

I. 

3-6. 

r27a. 

(( 

3. 

22.5c. 

X.  5. 

195b. 

II. 

3. 

394ac. 

II 

17. 

196a. 

"   8. 

195b. 

III 

1. 

2l7c,  502c. 

XI.  1. 

495n 

,  500c. 

Habakkuk. 

IV. 

5. 

218a,  392b,* 

508c,*  509a. 

I. 

6. 

107n. 

481b,*G29b. 

XII.  10. 

41 2n.* 

II. 

6. 

265b. 

XIII.  2. 

194b. 

u 

9. 

260b. 

Matthew. 

8. 

258b. 

III. 

10. 

251c.* 

I 

1- 

-17.      52  la.'^ 

XIV.  2. 

501a 

,  572b.* 

It 

17.      98c,  99a.* 

u 

1 

559a. 

762 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


Matthew. 

>Iatthew. 

Matthew. 

1. 11. 

122b. 

IX 

.  2. 

121c. 

XIII 

.  32. 

139c 

,  275c. 

"  12. 

523a. 

ti 

4. 

134a. 

(( 

35. 

512b.* 

"  13. 

523b. 

IL 

5. 

121c. 

u 

36. 

280a. 

"  15. 

523c. 

H 

8. 

134a. 

(( 

36-i3 

281n. 

"  16. 

523an. 

il 

9. 

134a. 

(( 

37-43 

313n. 

"  17. 

443n 

,  520a. 

tt 

11. 

134a. 

t( 

38. 

286a.* 

"  18. 

506b. 

(; 

17. 

198a.* 

u 

45. 

261c. 

"  20. 

397a 

521b. 

u 

19. 

134a. 

(1 

46. 

261c. 

"  22. 

494c 

,  505c  * 

u 

27. 

522a. 

u 

47-50 

280b.* 

506a,*  508n. 

X 

1. 

182b 

,  385c. 

il 

49. 

284a. 

"  24. 

134a. 

It 

6. 

291b. 

(( 

52. 

284c 

,  593c. 

II.  3. 

134a. 

(t 

15. 

134b. 

XV 

1-9. 

629a. 

"  12. 

397a. 

(1 

16. 

299a. 

It 

1-10. 

614a. 

"  13. 

397a. 

(( 

19. 

141b. 

(t 

14. 

302c. 

"  15. 

500c 

,  505c, 

(C 

20. 

141b. 

(t 

15. 

302c. 

508c  *  509n.* 

11 

27. 

122b. 

(( 

22. 

522a. 

"  16. 

513a. 

u 

29. 

145b. 

i( 

24. 

291b. 

"  17. 

512c.* 

u 

30. 

145b. 

XVI 

.  4. 

452n. 

"  18. 

512c.* 

a 

34-39. 

224b.* 

tt 

6. 

315a. 

"  19. 

397a. 

(( 

37. 

224b.* 

u 

12. 

315a. 

"  20. 

125b. 

XI. 

2. 

217b.* 

ii 

16-18. 

225c.* 

"  23. 

506a. 

ti 

3. 

217b.* 

(( 

17. 

157b. 

III.  2. 

218a. 

t( 

4-6. 

217b.* 

tt 

18.177 

a,225c,226c. 

"   4. 

309a. 

11 

5. 

216a.* 

228bc,  3] 

1 2a. 

"   5. 

249c.* 

l( 

10. 

502n. 

t( 

19. 

250b. 

"  11. 

575b. 

11 

12.  215c,  218n 

,221c. 

(i 

23. 

438c, 

452a, 

IV.  2. 

385b. 

11 

14.  392b,  481b,  482a, 

458a,*  490a. 

"  12. 

134a. 

575b,  629b. 

XVII 

2. 

255b, 

3 '.14b. 

"  14. 

505c. 

11 

15. 

21Sa. 

It 

10-13. 

392b 

575b, 

"  17. 

218a. 

(1 

16. 

443n. 

629b 

V.  9. 

180b.* 

11 

25. 

157b. 

tc 

17. 

443n. 

"  13. 

186a,* 

261a,* 

XII 

14. 

148c.* 

XVIII 

21. 

293b. 

302b. 

(I 

17. 

506a. 

ti 

22. 

293b. 

"  14-16. 

261b.* 

t( 

25. 

134a. 

(t 

23-34. 

293b. 

"  14. 

350b. 

u 

32. 

592a.* 

XIX. 

20. 

199b. 

"  15. 

356b. 

(( 

33. 

531b.* 

II 

21. 

294c. 

"  22. 

113n, 

134b,* 

u 

39. 

340b,* 

452n. 

11 

23-26. 

294c. 

526a. 

* 

a 

40. 

250c, 

452n. 

11 

27. 

298c, 

294c,* 

"  39. 

526a.* 

a 

43-45. 

472b.* 

313c. 

"  43. 

526c.* 

XIII. 

1. 

280b.* 

11 

28.  295bc,* 

484b, 

"  44. 

526c.* 

II 

2. 

280b,* 

282b.* 

489n. 

VI.  1. 

134b.* 

11 

3. 

262n, 

278c, 

II 

29. 

295bc.* 

"   9- 

13. 

139c. 

302a. 

XX. 

1-16. 

293c.* 

"  11. 

179b,* 

230n.* 

11 

4-9. 

139c. 

It 

16. 

295n, 

297n, 

"  24. 

225b.* 

11 

6. 

284c.* 

313c. 

"  28. 

122c. 

11 

7. 

285a. 

XXI. 

4. 

505c. 

"  34. 

179c, 

251c.* 

II 

9. 

283a. 

t( 

13. 

480a. 

;^ii.   2. 

355a. 

It 

10-17. 

278b. 

tl 

31. 

135b.* 

"   7. 

261c, 

280a. 

11 

11. 

158a, 

532c. 

It 

33-44.287a,i 

=  288a.* 

"  14. 

200n. 

11 

11-15. 

279a.* 

tt 

43. 

288a. 

"  15- 

20. 

257c.* 

II 

14. 

511c. 

a 

45. 

278a,  288a. 

"  17. 

262n. 

11 

15. 

511c. 

XXII. 

2-14. 

2S9h.* 

"  24- 

27. 

255c.* 

11 

18-23. 

281n. 

t( 

7.   290b,* 

47r.h. 

"  26. 

310c. 

It 

19. 

282b.* 

(t 

11-14. 

2911).^= 

"  27. 

310c. 

11 

22. 

285a. 

u 

29. 

465b, 

629h. 

"  28. 

407n. 

11 

24-30. 

313n. 

11 

29-32. 

5101). 

"  29. 

407n. 

11 

25. 

285a.* 

(I 

39. 

481a. 

III.  10. 

134a. 

It 

29. 

285a. 

(t 

41-16. 

5101.. 

"   14. 

134a. 

11 

30. 

180c. 

ti 

43. 

Mill. 

"   17. 

500c, 

506a. 

11 

31. 

139c, 

275c. 

il 

44. 

rile. 

"   18. 

134a. 

11 

31-33. 

487b. 

XXIII. 

13. 

S20a. 

INDEX  TO  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


763 


Matthew. 

XXIII.  16-24. 

614a. 

"       27. 

310a. 

"       34-36. 

478c. 

"       34-37. 

288c. 

"   34-38.  470c,  478c. 

•  "   34-39.     438a. 

"   35.   288c  *  292a, 

4Glc. 

"   36.   288c,»  461c. 

"   39.        441n. 

XXIV.  1-28.-     439a. 

"    2.        443b. 

3.   438b,*  440b, 

441n,  442n.* 

"    4_14.     439c. 

■'    4-51.    442bc. 

"    5.    460a,  498b. 

"    7.        430a. 

"    9.        470c. 

"   11.        460a. 

"   12.        460a. 

"   14.    443c,  444a,* 
553b. 

"   15-28.     439c. 

"   15.   472c,  574b. 

"   16.    476a,  483a. 

"   21.       448b.* 

"   22.       448b.* 

"   24.    460a,  498b. 

"   27.        451c. 

"   28.   121b,  480n. 

"   29.   306b,  446a, 
448b,*  452a,* 
470c,  483b, 
48911,  497a.* 

"   29-31.  439a,  443c, 
445c,*  448b,* 
449a,  461a, 
59611. 

"   29-36.     440n. 

"   29-44.     440a. 

"   30.   446c,*  452a,* 
468b. 

"   30-34.     473a. 

"   31.   382a,  447cn,* 
471a. 

"   34.   438c,  443bii,* 
458a.* 

"   35.        439a. 

"   36,    439a,  449n, 
497b. 

"   40-41.     447c. 

"   40.        458b.* 

"   41.    122c,  458b.* 

"   42^4.     457e. 

"   42.        599b. 

"   43.        439a. 

"   44.        599b. 

"  45-51.  440a. 
1.  383b,41)0n. 
1-13.  440a,  443a. 


XXV. 

1( 


XXV. 


XXVI, 


XXVII, 


Matthew. 

13.  599b. 
14-30.    224a,* 

440a,  443a. 

14.  439a. 
16-22     285c. 

28.  279n. 

29.  279n. 

30.  591c. 
3 1-46.43  lb,440a, 

443a,  444a, 
449a,*450bc,* 
486a,  487a,* 
594a. 

34.      486b. 

41.  294b,  486c. 

44.      487n. 

46.      486b. 

26-29.     140a. 

26.       147c. 

28.  199a. 

29.  198ab.* 
52.  273b. 
64.  469a. 
68.  407n. 
19.  594b. 
25.       469a. 

30.  254a.* 
38.       113n. 
37.       140a. 

52.  448a,*  594b, 
464ti,*  465c. 

53.  448a,*  464n,* 

465c,* 
60.       198b. 
1.       565n. 
3.  255b,  394b. 

8.  565n. 

9.  565n. 
10.  56511. 
19.      182b,  381c, 

589b. 


Mark. 

I.    6.  309a. 

"    10.  502n. 

III.  29.  592b.* 

IV.  3-9.  139c. 
"  10.  280a. 
"  12.  279n.* 
"  13.  280a. 
"  30-32.  139c. 
V.  35.  123a. 

"   41.      113n,  147n. 

VI.  11.  134b.* 

VII.     1-13.  629a. 

"       5-13.  614a. 

"     11.  113n. 

"     34.      11 3n,  147n. 

VIII.  12.  125c. 

"      15.  315a. 

"     27-30.  225c. 


u 
XXVIII. 


Mark. 

VIII.  35.  470b. 

IX.     1.  438c. 

"       3.  394b,  452a. 

"       8.  122c. 

"     48.  691c. 

X.    5.  57Sb. 

"   20.  199b. 

"  51.  llSn. 

XI.  13.  335b. 

"  14.  33ob. 

"  25.  506c,*  507n. 

XII.  1-12.  288a.* 

"   12.  278a. 

"   26.  604a. 

"  29.  380c. 

"   31.  581a. 

"   32.  380c. 

"  44.  199b. 

XIII.  2.  443b. 
"   3.  438b. 

4.  438b,  440b. 

"   14.  574b. 

"   24.  448c.* 

"   27.  382a. 

"   30.  438c,  443b.* 

"  32.  444n,*  449n,* 

456a,  457a. 

"   35.  444n.* 

XIV.  3.  179c,*  180a.* 
"  22-24.  140a. 
"  22.  147c. 
"  36.  113n,  125a. 
"  65.  407n. 

XV.  26.  140a. 

"     32.  254a.* 

XVI.    2.  565n. 

"        8.  565n. 

"        9.  56511. 

"      10.  565n. 

'•      11.  56511. 

"      17.  198c,*  402b. 

Luke. 

I.  1.  55Sa. 

"  3.  144c,*  554c. 

"  4.  564c. 

"  10.  365a. 

"  15.  12.5a. 
"  17.  481b,  585b,  629h. 

•'  32.  i>-n\>. 

"  46-55.  139iK 

"  50.  122:1. 

"  58.  122a. 

"  66.  12.ih. 

"  67.  4(>7n. 

"  70.  566r. 

"  80.  1221>. 

II.  1.  250c,*  444ii. 

"   7.  122b. 

"  14.  180c. 

"  15.  125a. 


764 


INDEX  TO  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


Luke. 

Luke. 

John. 

II.  32. 

564b. 

XVI 

.  9. 

126a,*  183  c. 

I.  1. 

47a, 

588c*n- 

"  40. 

122b. 

a 

9- 

-13 

300c.* 

"  3. 

589a. 

"  45. 

521c. 

u 

16. 

218b,*  221c. 

"  4. 

589a. 

III.  23-28. 

521a.* 

a 

19- 

-31 

301b.* 

"  11. 

288c. 

'^  23. 

521n,*  523a. 

u 

25. 

294b. 

"  14. 

146c 

,  588n,  68ii:i.* 

"  24. 

523c. 

u 

29. 

249a.* 

"  18. 

588bii  * 

"  26. 

523c. 

XVII 

20. 

447a.* 

"  23. 

575b. 

"  27. 

523b.* 

u 

22. 

444n.* 

"  41-43. 

22Cb.* 

"  27-31. 

523b. 

XVIII 

1- 

-8. 

444n.* 

"  43. 

22(!c. 

»  38. 

212a 

,  564c. 

i( 

1- 

-14 

293b. 

"  52. 

3981). 

IV.  22. 

126a 

278b. 

(1 

8. 

46()a. 

II.  15. 

48(ia. 

"  23.  265c,  276c,  278b, 

i; 

21. 

199b. 

"  19. 

274u. 

329a 

.* 

u 

30. 

295n. 

"  19- 

-21. 

452n.* 

"  36. 

"l82b. 

XIX 

11- 

-27 

224a.* 

"  22. 

141c. 

V.  1-10. 

2U2a.* 

u 

12. 

280b,*  444n.* 

"  25. 

271b. 

"  8. 

122c. 

u 

16- 

-19 

285c. 

III.  1- 

-13. 

271b.* 

"  20. 

121c. 

XX 

9- 

-18 

288a.* 

"   3- 

■8, 

593b. 

VII.  27. 

502n. 

u 

11. 

125c. 

"   4. 

182b. 

VIII.  5-8. 

139c. 

<1 

19. 

278a,  288a. 

"   5. 

366a. 

8. 

283a. 

u 

21. 

125b. 

"   8. 

182ab.* 

"   10. 

279n.* 

11 

35. 

464b,*  484b. 

•'   9. 

182b. 

"   11. 

283n 

285c.* 

11 

36. 

464b,*  4S4b. 

"  14. 

341a*ii. 

"   12. 

283a. 

XXI 

4. 

199c. 

"  15. 

341a.* 

"  U. 

199bc.* 

11 

5- 

-7. 

444n.* 

"  16. 

578c 

,  591a.* 

"   18. 

279n.* 

11 

6. 

438b,  443b. 

"  20. 

156c. 

"   29. 

122a. 

11 

7. 

438b,  440b. 

"  29. 

125c 

490n. 

"   81. 

481a. 

u 

10. 

430a. 

IV.  10- 

■15. 

272a. 

IX.  1-6. 

273a. 

a 

11. 

430a,  461b.* 

"  19. 

407n. 

"  18-21. 

225c. 

11 

14. 

125b. 

"  22. 

68c. 

"  27. 

438c 

452a. 

11 

16. 

470b. 

"  23. 

157b.* 

"  55. 

182a. 

a 

19. 

470b. 

"  24. 

157b, 

*182b,589c.* 

X.  1.297c,385c,*520b.  | 

11 

20. 

472c,  574b. 

"  32- 

38. 

272a.* 

"  18. 

472n, 

476a. 

a 

21. 

476a. 

V.  2. 

113n. 

"  27. 

581a. 

a 

24. 

125b,  443c, 

"  11. 

121c. 

"  30. 

14.5c. 

445an,*449n, 

"  15. 

121c. 

"  30-37. 

280c,* 

293b. 

473c,  474a. 

"  22. 

450b.* 

XI.  2-4. 

139c. 

11 

25- 

■26. 

471bn. 

a  04_ 

29. 

464c.* 

"   3. 

179b,* 

230n.* 

a 

25- 

■27 

445n.* 

"  27. 

450b.* 

"   5-8. 

293b. 

11 

28. 

445n. 

"  28. 

493a. 

XII.  1. 

315a. 

11 

32. 

438c,  443b.* 

"  39. 

18c, 

200n 

5101), 

"   16-20. 

29.'ib.* 

a 

38. 

122c. 

629a,  692b. 

"   28. 

121c. 

XXII. 

15. 

125e.* 

"  40. 

510b. 

"   38. 

444n.* 

a 

19. 

140a,  147c. 

VI.  15. 

218b. 

XIII.  1-5. 

292a.* 

a 

20. 

140a. 

"  17. 

122b. 

6-9. 

291c,* 

335b. 

a 

28- 

30. 

484b. 

"  39. 

867n. 

"   18. 

139c. 

11 

36. 

273a.* 

"  53- 

59. 

272a. 

"   19. 

139c. 

11 

64. 

407ii. 

"  63. 

182a. 

"   29. 

382a. 

XXIII. 

38. 

140a,  273c. 

VII.  12. 

123a. 

"   32. 

248b. 

XXIV. 

1. 

565n. 

"  30. 

121c. 

XIV.  14. 

464b. 

t( 

8. 

141c. 

"  32. 

122c. 

"   16-24. 

2891).* 

a 

9- 

11. 

565n. 

"  38. 

501a. 

"   16. 

290c,* 

291b. 

u 

13. 

565n. 

"  40. 

407n. 

"   23. 

21  Cc* 

(i 

19. 

407n. 

IX.  22. 

318a. 

"   26. 

224a.* 

22r)a. 

It 

22. 

122c. 

"  30- 

33. 

318c. 

XV.  2. 

297c. 

(t 

25. 

346a.* 

"  39-41. 

319b 

8. 

122b. 

(( 

26. 

508a. 

X.  1- 

16. 

317a.* 

"   12. 

199c. 

a 

27. 

18c,  249a,* 

"   6. 

265c 

329a. 

"   30. 

199c. 

629a,  692b.    | 

"  17. 

318a. 

XVI.  1-13. 

297b.* 

(1 

44. 

18c.  508a.* 

"  34- 

36. 

510b. 

"   8. 

126a,*298an,*| 

tt 

49. 

402b. 

XI.  25. 

465c. 

355a,  443n.    1 

"  51. 

4u7ii. 

INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


765 


John. 

•lohn. 

Acta. 

XII 

3. 

179c,*  180a. 

XXI.  2 

1-24 

. 

473b. 

XI.  18. 

200n. 

(1 

13. 

125a. 

"   23. 

558a. 

"  26. 

644b. 

11 

16. 

141c. 

"   25. 

253b. 

"  27. 

407n. 

(1 

23- 

-33 

553b. 

"  28.' 

407n. 

u 

25. 

225c. 

Acts. 

XII.  3. 

125c. 

It 

31. 

476a. 

I.  1. 

576b. 

"   6. 

319c. 

it 

38. 

505c. 

"  7. 

449n. 

"   7. 

576a. 

XIII 

18. 

505c. 

"  10. 

349b. 

"  14. 

319c. 

u 

24. 

133c.* 

"  11. 

468n.* 

"  21. 

594b. 

(( 

34. 

198b.* 

"  16. 

508a 

566b. 

"  22 

461b.* 

XIV. 

2. 

183c,  184b. 

"  18. 

121c. 

"  23! 

461b.* 

(C 

4. 

398b. 

"  19. 

113n. 

XIII.  1. 

407n. 

11 

6. 

398b. 

•'  21. 

557c. 

"   18. 

18UC. 

t( 

23. 

361a. 

"  22. 

557c. 

"   21. 

515b. 

u 

25. 

576a. 

II.  3. 

402b,*  408n.* 

"   22. 

522a. 

a 

26. 

141c,  503b, 

"   4. 

198c 

402b.* 

"   23. 

522a. 

576a,  589c. 

"   4- 

-13. 

230n.* 

"   33. 

504a. 

XV 

1. 

302a,  303n, 

"   5, 

6. 

127c. 

"  46. 

291b. 

320n.* 

"   5- 

■12. 

403b.* 

"   48. 

2<  »0n. 

u 

1- 

-10. 

320c. 

"   5. 

613c. 

XIV.  13. 

319c. 

;( 

1- 

-6. 

593b. 

"   9- 

-11. 

127c.* 

•'   16. 

443n. 

(( 

2. 

279n. 

"  13. 

403a. 

XV.  21. 

443n. 

11 

25. 

505c. 

"  17. 

432a. 

"  32. 

407n. 

11 

26. 

589c. 

"  23. 

469a. 

"  40. 

235a. 

XVI 

7- 

15. 

576a. 

"  25- 

31. 

630b.* 

"  41. 

235a. 

i. 

7. 

589c. 

"  28. 

199n. 

XVI.  6. 

235b, 

240b, 

u 

l.S- 

15. 

141c. 

"  36. 

469a. 

241 

n. 

(.1 

15. 

329a. 

"  47. 

456a. 

"   7. 

240b, 

576b. 

u 

29. 

329a. 

III.  18. 

566c. 

9. 

397a, 

576b. 

u 

33. 

180c. 

IV.  17. 

125c. 

"   12-40. 

23.5c. 

XVII. 

7. 

122a. 

"  27. 

479n. 

"   26. 

576a. 

11 

12. 

505c. 

V.  4. 

125b. 

"   34. 

122c. 

11 

17. 

22b,  582b. 

"  19. 

576a. 

XVII.  22. 

236a. 

11 

21- 

23. 

361a.* 

"  20. 

576a. 

"   25. 

199c. 

(1 

24. 

367n.* 

"  23. 

319c. 

"   28. 

120b, 

501c. 

?:viii. 

9. 

505c. 

"  30. 

469a. 

XVIII.  9. 

397a. 

11 

22. 

527a. 

VI.  1. 

123a 

,  613c. 

"   12. 

594b. 

11 

23. 

527a. 

VII.  14. 

519n. 

•'   16. 

594b. 

11 

28. 

121a. 

"  16. 

150a.* 

"   24. 

611b, 

638a. 

11 

32. 

505c. 

"  25. 

102b. 

XIX.  1. 

121c. 

11 

36. 

273b. 

"  38. 

176c.* 

6. 

402c. 

XIX. 

12. 

480a. 

"  43. 

336n. 

"   32. 

176n. 

u 

13. 

113n. 

.     "  44. 

336n. 

"   33. 

176n. 

u 

15. 

480a.* 

"  52. 

288c. 

"   39. 

176c. 

a 

17. 

113a. 

"  5.3. 

566c. 

"   40. 

176n. 

u 

19. 

140a. 

"  54. 

150a. 

XX.  28. 

177a. 

i( 

20. 

113n. 

"  56. 

576a. 

"   35. 

.501a. 

u 

24. 

505c. 

VIII.  1. 

476a. 

XXI.  10. 

407n. 

i( 

36. 

505c. 

"  29. 

576b. 

"  11. 

407n. 

u 

41. 

198b.* 

"  39. 

576b. 

"   40. 

1 1 3n. 

XX. 

2. 

565n. 

IX.  10. 

576b. 

XXII.  2. 

11. 3n. 

11 

4. 

565n. 

"  15. 

126a. 

17. 

401a. 

11 

12. 

394b. 

"  17. 

576b. 

"   17- 

21. 

576b. 

11 

16. 

147n. 

"  36. 

122b. 

XXIII.  3. 

121c, 

310a, 

11 

18. 

56on. 

X.  3- 

7. 

576b. 

627a. 

It 

25. 

336n. 

"   9. 

401a.* 

25. 

336n. 

11 

31. 

211a,  561b. 

"   9- 

16. 

576b. 

XXV.  6. 

594b. 

XXI. 

1. 

565n. 

"  10. 

401a.* 

10. 

594b. 

11 

15. 

148a. 

"  4.3. 

18c. 

"   11. 

528n. 

(1 

IS- 

17. 

200b.* 

"  46. 

11 9n, 

402b. 

"   17. 

594b. 

11 

IS. 

273c.* 

XI.  16. 

141c. 

XXVI.  4. 

199b. 

766 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


Ac«8. 

Romans. 

1  Corinthians 

, 

XXVI.    7. 

123a. 

IX.  13. 

225c. 

IV. 

8. 

253c.* 

14. 

113n. 

a 

14. 

324a. 

a 

14. 

254a. 

XXVII.  20. 

5.51  )a. 

u 

23. 

122a. 

•' 

18. 

313a. 

23. 

397a. 

5 

:.    9. 

228c. 

V. 

1. 

313b. 

"        37. 

250c. 

( 

12. 

580c. 

^* 

2. 

313b. 

iXVIII.    3. 

237n.* 

1 

14. 

177a. 

a 

5. 

314  b. 

i 

15. 

177a. 

i> 

6- 

■8. 

314c.* 

Romans. 

XI.    2. 

433b 

504a. 

a 

6. 

317n. 

I.    3. 

522a. 

(( 

3. 

125b. 

a 

7. 

199a,= 

*=  200c,* 

"    7. 

177a. 

11 

5. 

250a.* 

364n,  593b. 

"  16. 

213c.* 

i( 

7. 

250a.* 

a 

8. 

2G0c. 

"  22. 

186a.* 

11 

12. 

390c. 

VI. 

1. 

313b. 

II.  is! 

182a.* 

11 

25.  279b,390c,445n. 

ti 

2. 

484b. 

"    29. 

182a.* 

i( 

33-36. 

214b. 

VIII. 

4. 

380c. 

III.    1. 

604a. 

" 

33. 

271a. 

IX. 

1. 

557c. 

"     2. 

597a, 

604a. 

XII.     1. 

317n. 

X. 

1-4. 

321b. 

"     9-19. 

510a. 

" 

4. 

255c. 

a 

1- 

5. 

337n. 

"    13. 

r22a. 

11 

5. 

177b. 

a 

1- 

-11. 

334c. 

"    20. 

529a, 

531b. 

11 

6. 

406n, 

579an.* 

a 

6. 

324a. 

"   21. 

214a.* 

(1 

18. 

527a.* 

a 

6. 

337n.* 

"    24-26. 

591a. 

11 

19. 

528a. 

a 

11. 

337n,* 

339c, 

"   25. 

362b.* 

XIII.     1-5. 

526b. 

441b.* 

"   28. 

338c, 

529a. 

(1 

1. 

527c.* 

C( 

14. 

123a. 

"   30. 

250a.* 

i( 

4. 

528an.* 

a 

21. 

250a.* 

IV,    3. 

510a 

529a. 

a 

6. 

527a.* 

XI. 

8. 

567b. 

"     10. 

338c, 

530b. 

a 

12. 

186b,*  3  IGc. 

a 

21. 

313b. 

"     11. 

530b. 

XIV.  10. 

594b.* 

a 

23- 

-25. 

140a. 

V.    1. 

1230. 

XV.    4. 

659c. 

a 

23- 

-26. 

230a. 

"      6-10. 

591a. 

ii 

20. 

228a. 

a 

24. 

147c. 

"    12. 

200n. 

XVI.    5. 

177a. 

a 

27. 

135a."- 

"    12-21. 

343b.* 

(( 

20. 

180c. 

a 

29. 

134c.* 

"    14. 

334c, 

337n,* 

(( 

25. 

279b. 

XII. 

10. 

402c 

403b. 

338b,  343b. 

i( 

12- 

28. 

177b. 

"    14-20. 

337a. 

1  Corinthians 

. 

a 

12. 

2r)5c. 

"    15-17. 

343c. 

I. 

2. 

177a. 

(( 

28. 

402c. 

"    17. 

363c. 

11 

12. 

121c. 

XIII 

1. 

402c,*  404a. 

"    19. 

338b. 

11 

14. 

139c. 

a 

2. 

531b. 

VI.    3-11. 

264b. 

11 

16. 

139c. 

a 

9! 

409a. 

"       4. 

199a,*2(l"c.* 

" 

18. 

280a. 

ik 

12. 

270c.* 

"       5. 

209a. 

2(i4a. 

u 

20. 

186a. 

XIV. 

2- 

-19. 

402c,*  403a.* 

"       6. 

209a, 

264  a. 

u 

22. 

128a. 

a 

2. 

404  a. 

"       8. 

264a. 

a 

24. 

1 28a. 

a 

3. 

407n. 

"     11. 

2G4a. 

a 

27-29. 

149c.* 

a 

4. 

407n. 

"     17. 

336n. 

II. 

1. 

149b. 

a 

5. 

122b. 

VII.    1-6. 

321a. 

ii 

1-5. 

228a.* 

ii 

6. 

42Sa.* 

"        6. 

199a. 

a 

4. 

149b. 

a 

18. 

188a. 

"       7-13. 

531b. 

a 

5. 

150a. 

ii 

24. 

407n. 

VIII.    1. 

134a.* 

a 

6.  149b,  182a 

, 641n. 

a 

25. 

407n. 

"        2. 

184c. 

a 

7-11. 

157c. 

a 

29. 

188a. 

3.' 

341a. 

(i 

7. 

641n. 

a 

31. 

407n. 

4. 

134a,* 

184c. 

a 

9. 

271a. 

a 

84. 

187c.-"- 

r)-8. 

184c. 

a 

13. 

13Sa. 

a 

36. 

187c." 

"         6. 

157c. 

*• 

14. 

156b 

,  271c. 

XV 

1- 

-22. 

594  b. 

7. 

l.-.r.c. 

III. 

3. 

313a. 

11 

4- 

-7. 

230a. 

0-11. 

18L'b. 

(( 

G. 

312b. 

It 

6. 

207c. 

"      11. 

465b 

594c. 

t( 

9. 

122b 

177b. 

11 

8. 

122c. 

"      15. 

12.-)a. 

a 

10. 

227c,* 

312b. 

11 

12. 

3131.. 

"      1 9-23. 

127a. 

i( 

10-15. 

310c.* 

11 

14. 

554  a. 

"      28-30. 

433a. 

a 

11. 

228ab. 

11 

15. 

554a. 

"      29. 

433b. 

<i 

22. 

199c. 

11 

19. 

199c. 

"      33-36. 

252c.* 

IV. 

7. 

254a. 

11 

20- 

-28. 

462c.- 

INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


767 


1  Corinthians. 

Galatians. 

Ephesians. 

XV.  23. 

465c. 

III. 

24. 

338a. 

VI 

13- 

-17. 

186c.* 

"   24.  390c,  450b,  486a. 

U 

25. 

344b. 

U 

17. 

273b. 

"   25. 

390c. 

(( 

27. 

31711,  680c. 

a 

21. 

139b. 

"   31. 

456c. 

U 

28. 

580c. 

"   32. 

456c. 

IV. 

3. 

183a.* 

Philippians. 

"   33. 

315a,  501c. 

(( 

8. 

183a.* 

I. 

7. 

236c. 

"   36. 

31711. 

(( 

9. 

183a.* 

(i 

13. 

122a,  236c. 

"   87. 

594c. 

(( 

13. 

235b. 

a 

14. 

236c. 

"   39-45. 

594c. 

u 

21- 

-31. 

303a,  321a.* 

(( 

20. 

199c. 

"   45-49. 

337a. 

(( 

21. 

G3()a. 

II. 

7. 

588b. 

"  45. 

338b. 

(C 

24. 

265c. 

L( 

15. 

350b. 

"   47-54. 

lS4b. 

u 

25. 

478b. 

III. 

7- 

11. 

456c. 

"  47. 

5G7b. 

1( 

26. 

475b. 

a 

10. 

464ab,*  465b, 

"   51. 

448a,*  455b,* 

V 

2. 

219a.* 

485  b. 

456c. 

a 

3. 

219a.* 

(i 

11. 

464ab,*  484b. 

"   52. 

338c,  44Sa,* 

u 

4. 

21Se.* 

a 

17. 

33Gn. 

455b,*  463c. 

a 

6. 

531b. 

a 

21. 

594c. 

"   63. 

184b. 

n 

9. 

315a,  317n. 

IV. 

6. 

122b. 

XVI.  8. 

314n,  316b. 

a 

20. 

123a. 

a 

8. 

23c. 

"   22. 

113n. 

VI. 

1. 

182a. 

a 

15- 

-18. 

189b,23Gc. 

u 

7. 

317n. 

u 

18. 

317n. 

2  Corinthians. 

u 

15. 

593b. 

II.  17. 

22c. 

Colossian.t. 

III.  5. 

151n. 

Ephesians. 

I. 

G. 

444  a. 

"   6. 

15111,  199a.* 

I. 

7. 

591a. 

a 

18. 

177b,  4G3a. 

"  13-16. 

321a.* 

n 

15. 

3G7a.* 

a 

20. 

180c,  363b. 

"  14-16. 

618a. 

a 

17. 

158a.* 

a 

23. 

444a. 

IV.  16. 

122b. 

a 

18. 

126a,*  158a.* 

a 

26. 

,  279b. 

"  17. 

.  184a.* 

u 

19. 

126a. 

II. 

7. 

311c. 

V.  1-4. 

183b.* 

it 

22. 

177a. 

4( 

8. 

183a,  614a,  629c. 

"   3. 

3l7n. 

u 

23. 

177b,  452n,  490a. 

a 

12. 

20911,  263c,* 

"   4. 

199n. 

II. 

10. 

367a.* 

2G4b.* 

"  7. 

271b. 

u 

14. 

180c. 

a 

17. 

338a. 

"  10. 

594b.* 

(t 

15. 

198a,  199a.* 

a 

20. 

ISSa. 

"  14. 

208c.* 

a 

20. 

177b,  243c,* 

a 

23. 

180c.* 

"  17. 

593b. 

31 3a. 

III. 

3. 

209b. 

VI.  16-18. 

500c. 

u 

20- 

22. 

227a.*  227c, 

a 

10. 

122b,  198a,  199a.* 

VIII.  21. 

505b.* 

228b,  311c. 

a 

22. 

123a,  580c. 

X.  4. 

484a. 

u 

21. 

122b,  177b. 

IV. 

11. 

12Gc. 

XI.  21. 

139c. 

u 

22. 

229a,  361a. 

a 

14. 

126c. 

"  23. 

139c. 

III. 

5. 

18b,  227a, 

XII.  "{-4. 

401a,*  576b. 

407n. 

1  Thessalonians. 

"   4. 

404a,  428a. 

a 

16. 

122b. 

I. 

1. 

177a. 

"   7. 

125a,  401b. 

It 

18. 

261c,*  26211.* 

a 

7. 

336n. 

"  11. 

139c. 

a 

21. 

177a. 

II. 

1. 

139b. 

XIII.  11. 

180c. 

IV. 

11. 

227a. 

a 

12. 

177a. 

••   13. 

589b. 

a 

12. 

22c. 

a 

13. 

14Ic. 

"   14. 

381c. 

a 

13. 

22c. 

a 

17. 

139b. 

u 

24. 

265c,*  31711. 

a 

18. 

139b. 

Galatians. 

V. 

2. 

31711. 

III. 

1. 

139b.  23Ga. 

I.  13. 

629b. 

a 

8. 

250a,  350b. 

IV. 

13- 

17. 

.   4.54a.* 

"  14. 

629b. 

u 

8- 

10. 

364c.* 

" 

13. 

456c.* 

"  16. 

316c. 

a 

14. 

501a. 

a 

15. 

455b,*  456n. 

II.  6. 

125b,  577b. 

u 

23. 

490a. 

a 

16. 

448 

a,*463c,465c, 

"   9. 

227b,*  243b,* 

a 

26. 

4901). 

47S 

a,  596ii. 

530a,  557c,  577b.   | 

a 

27. 

328a,  490b. 

a 

17. 

448a,*  455b,* 

"  15. 

528c.* 

a 

31- 

33. 

825a. 

4G3c. 

"  16. 

528c.* 

VI. 

5. 

580f. 

V. 

1. 

449u. 

III.  1. 

152a. 

(( 

6. 

r23a. 

(I 

1- 

10. 

457c. 

"  13. 

,      341a. 
566c. 

a 

11- 

17. 

316b,*  484a. 

C( 

2. 

449n. 

"  19. 

a 

12. 

476u.* 

a 

8." 

186c,  316c,  317a. 

768 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


3  Thessalonians. 

Philemon. 

James. 

I. 

1. 

462a.* 

2. 

177a. 

I. 

1-4. 

631a. 

it 

8. 

462a.* 

9. 

24  In. 

ti 

7. 

200a. 

II. 

1-8. 

236a. 

16. 

580c. 

it 

13. 

122c. 

ii 

1-10. 

469a.* 

it 

21. 

530a. 

i( 

2. 

603b. 

Hebrews. 

it 

22- 

•25. 

529a. 

a 

3-10. 

476b,  596n.* 

I. 

1. 

19a 

,  142b, 

tt 

25. 

530a. 

u 

3-8. 

498b. 

503c, 

536b, 

tt 

27. 

530c. 

(( 

4. 

46  In.* 

566c. 

II. 

3. 

121c 

(1 

ii 

5-1. 
8. 

479b. 
483c,  596n.* 

11 
11 

2. 
14. 

553b.* 
252c.* 

It 

8. 

529b 
581a. 

530a. 

III. 

9. 

336n. 

II. 

2. 

566c. 

(t 

14- 

-17 

531a. 

III. 

1- 

-6. 

343a.* 

tt 

15. 

530c. 

1  Timothy. 

" 

3. 

337a. 

tl 

16. 

530c. 

I. 

4. 

614a,  G29c. 

I( 

11. 

125c.* 

ti 

17. 

529b. 

i. 

1(). 

200n. 

IV. 

9. 

339a. 

ft 

21- 

-24 

529b.* 

II. 

2. 

199c.* 

ii 

14. 

339b. 

It 

21. 

530c. 

ii 

7." 

J77a. 

V. 

1. 

351c. 

it 

24. 

338c 

531a. 

III. 

13. 

121c. 

11 

10- 

■14. 

346a.* 

in. 

17. 

180b. 

It 

15. 

228a.* 

tl 

12. 

183a. 

IV. 

14. 

199c. 

11 

16.          136an*589a.* 

11 

13. 

182a. 

V. 

11. 

180c. 

IV. 

1-3. 

460a. 

tt 

14. 

181c.* 

ii 
it 

7. 
12. 

629c. 
199b,  336n. 

VI. 
VII. 

5. 
1. 

576a. 
341c.* 

I. 

1  Peter. 

TI. 

1. 

580c. 

a 

2. 

339b. 

1. 
2. 

433b. 
433b. 

U 

2. 

580c. 

11 

6. 

122b. 

(( 

2o! 

614a,  629q, 

It 
11 

9. 
14. 
16. 

5. 
12. 
13. 

7- 

8. 

9. 
10. 
11. 
12. 
14. 
15. 
22. 
23. 

122b. 

522a.* 

199n. 

336n. 

121b. 

1  f\r\^ 

t( 

10. 
11. 

407n. 
14(ibc.* 

•I. 

ii 

2  Timothy. 

I.                       200n. 
IS                        336n. 

11 

VIII. 

tt 
it 
tt 

12. 
18. 
19. 

339a 

140bc.* 
591a. 
591a. 

II. 

3-6. 

257a.* 

ii 

II. 

4. 

228b.* 

it 
ii 
a 
ii 
it 
(I 
i; 

4. 

8. 
11. 

14-16. 
15. 
16. 
17. 

199c. 
622a. 
485b.* 
G29c. 
22b. 
257c. 
257c. 

IX. 

ii 

tt 
tt 
tl 
It 
tl 

12. 

344a.* 
368b,*  398b. 
265c,     276c. 

344n. 
366c.*491b. 
339b,    366c.* 

ii 

ft 
tt 

III. 

5. 

6. 

9. 

14. 

18. 

177b,  22Sb,* 
311c,  361a, 
364b,  452n. 

228c. 

177ab,  364b. 

526b. 

591a. 

ti 

20. 

257b.* 

tt 

198a. 

359a.* 

491b. 

«t 

18- 

20. 

592b.* 

ti 
ti 
it 

21. 
23. 
24. 

257b.* 

629c. 

154b.* 

tl 
tt 

tt 

IV. 

11 

21. 
3. 
6. 

321b, 

3b6n. 

199b.* 

592c. 

III. 

1-9. 

460a. 

if 

24. 
26. 
27. 
28. 
1. 

336n 

,  St'.Gc* 
44  Ic* 
599a. 
339a. 
573b. 

11 

15. 

12.3ft. 

11 

8. 

501b. 

(( 

11 

17. 

354b. 

ii 

15. 

22b,  503a. 

a 

11 

18. 

505b.* 

tt 

16.  68b. 
150b 

140b,  142a, 
,*157c,267c. 

X. 

338a 

V. 

3. 

336n. 

It 

493c 
17. 

6-8. 

6. 
13.. 

582a.* 
142a,*  181c.* 
456c. 
459n. 
121a,  139c. 

ti 
it 

19- 
19. 

22. 

336a,  367a.=i= 
368b,  491b. 

2  Peter. 

IV. 

*i 

tt 

(i 

XI. 

tl 

tt 

22. 
10. 
19. 
34. 

265c 

491b. 
183c. 
276c. 
125b. 

I. 

it 

19- 
21. 

21. 

630b.* 
140b,*  167c, 
406n, 
666c. 

Tit 

us. 

tt 

35. 

464b. 

II. 

22. 

265c,*  329a. 

T. 

2_ 

200n. 

XII. 

22- 

24. 

368b.* 

III. 

8. 

49Ga.* 

" 

12. 

120b,  501c. 

11 

22. 

491a,=t 

491n. 

tt 

10. 

183a, 

44Gb, 

u 

14. 

614a,  G29b. 

11 

2.^ 

182a, 

490b. 

i49n,  596n. 

II. 

336n. 

II 

24. 

1 98a, 

199a.* 

ii 

10- 

13. 

489n.* 

Ii 

8. 

121c. 

11 

26- 

28. 

452a,* 

it 

12. 

596n. 

ti 

13. 

452b. 

489n,  490a,* 

tt 

15. 

501a. 

III. 

5. 

593b. 

578a. 

ti 

16. 

20c,  102b 

501a, 

II 

9. 

629c. 

XIII. 

15. 

501a. 

603b. 

INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


769 


1  John. 


I. 
II. 


5. 

Y. 

8. 
12. 
16. 


200a. 

198b.* 

198c.* 

121c. 

199c.* 


III. 
IV. 


18.  460a,  465b,  498b. 
460a. 
16.5c. 
199c.* 
157a.* 
591a. 
228c. 
15'7a,*  361a. 
130b,  172e,  590b. 
200an. 


19. 

20. 
17. 

7. 

9. 
15. 
16. 

7. 
20. 


2  John. 


Jude. 


27911. 


3. 

211ab.* 

4. 

2nab.* 

6. 

501b. 

9. 

501b. 

14. 

501b. 

21. 

122a. 

Revelation. 

1. 

1. 

241b,*  466cn,* 
577c. 

Jl. 

1-3. 

487a. 

-<1 

3. 

241b,*  407n. 

^1 

4. 

240b,  589b. 

-<l 

4-6. 

468b. 

*l 

5. 

589b. 

tl 

6. 

364b,  488n. 

a 

7. 

468bn,*  479a. 

.(( 

9. 

239c.* 

a 

11. 

240b. 

(( 

12. 

335c. 

(1 

13-16. 

327c,  473a. 

II. 

3. 

239n. 

n 

6. 

469b. 

a 

7. 

363a. 

<( 

13. 

469b,  474a. 

« 

17. 

199a. 

n 

20. 

469b. 

(t 

26. 

475c,  484c. 

i( 

27. 

475c,  484c. 

[II. 

12. 

199a. 

(. 

21. 

470n,  484c. 

IV. 

3. 

334c. 

u 

6-8. 

363a. 

l( 

7. 

363b. 

it 

8. 

381c. 

(( 

11. 

239n. 

V. 

1. 

469c. 

u 

6. 470a,*473n,480n. 

it 

8. 

365a. 

n 

9. 

199a. 

at 

10. 
49 

364b,  488n. 

Revelation. 


V. 
VI. 


■8. 


VII. 


VIII. 


IX. 


XI. 


XII, 


11. 
1- 

2. 

2-8 

5. 

6. 

9. 


49  In. 
417b,*  430a. 
394b. 
433a. 
394b. 
394b. 
239n,  348n, 
470b.* 
9-11.      485b. 

10.  470b,*  475a. 

11.  470c. 
12-17.      470c.* 

1.  382a. 

2.  125c. 

3.  433b. 
4-8.  383c. 
9.         394b. 

13-17.      491n. 

2.  i33b. 

3.  365a. 

4.  365a. 

5.  433b. 

13.  471c. 
1.         472n.* 
4.         433b. 

11.     473n,  480b. 

14.  472b.* 

1.  473an.* 

2.  369a. 

6.  473b. 

7.  384b,*  473b. 
8-11.   369a,  473b.* 
1-3.       241a.* 

1.  473c.* 

2.  384bc,  386b, 

445n. 
384c,*  386a, 
474an.* 
352a,*  417c. 
473n,  481a. 
241a,*  352b, 
391ab,  472b, 
474u,  479an.* 

182a. 

475a. 

467n,  475a.* 

475a. 

475a. 

433b. 

475b,*  488b. 

383b,  473n, 

480b.* 

475a,*  477b. 

384b. 

386a,  389b. 

472b,  473n, 

499n. 
239n,  477b. 
384b.* 
126a,  386a, 
445b. 


3. 

4. 

7. 
8. 


11 

14. 

15. 

18. 

19. 

24. 

1. 

3. 

5. 

6,  12. 
6. 

7. 

11. 
13. 
14. 


XII. 

a 

XIII. 


Revelation. 

15. 


3841).* 

17.  4701). 
1.       383b,    417a,* 

473n,  476a,* 
479b,  480a. 
"  2.  417a,*  484a. 
"  5.  384c,*  386b. 
"  7.  476b. 
"  8.  491n. 
"  11.   417b,*473n, 

476b,*  484a. 
"  12.        484a. 
"  14.        23911. 
"  18.    238a,  269b,* 
390n,  477a, 
480b. 
XIV.  1.   472b,  473n. 
1-5.      477a.* 
"    3.        199a. 

6.  477b.* 
"  7.  477b.* 
"    8.   391b,*477c, 

479n,*483a. 
"    9-12.     477c. 
"   13.        477c.* 
"   14.        47311. 
"   14-16.     478a. 
"   20.        47411. 
XVI.  12.        472b. 
"   13.        477a. 
"   16.        472b. 
"   19.   391b,*  47911,* 
488a. 
XVII.  1-3.      391c.* 
1.       472b. 
"    1-4.      488b. 
"    3.        473n. 
"    5.   391b,*  472b. 
"    7-18.     479a.* 
"    8.   473n,  479b,* 

480a,*  498c. 
"    9.   479a,  480cn.* 
"   10.        241n. 
"   11.    353a,  476n,* 

482a.* 
"   12.    353a,  383b. 
"   15.        472b. 

18.  479an.* 

1.  482a.* 
1-3.               48:;a. 

2.  391b,  472n. 
47311. 

483a. 


XVIII. 


XIX. 


4-20 
10. 
15. 
21-24. 

7. 

8. 
10. 
11. 


239n. 

23911. 

483b.* 

49()n. 

394b. 
482a,  488a. 
394b,  473u, 


483b,*  487a. 


770 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  TEXTS. 


Reve 

lation. 

Revelation. 

Revelation. 

IX 

11-16. 

483c. 

XX. 

11- 

-15. 

486a.* 

XXI. 

22. 

367b.*  417b, 

t 

17-21. 

483c. 

(. 

12- 

-15. 

493a. 

492a. 

i 

20. 

47Vii. 

4i 

12. 

594a. 

11 

23. 

417b,  492a. 

[X 

1-3. 

484a. 

XXI. 

1. 

199a,  489n. 

u 

24. 

490n. 

t( 

1-6. 

487a.* 

'• 

1- 

■8. 

486a,  488b. 

u 

27. 

491n. 

t( 

2-7. 

31)()a.* 

11 

2. 

472b. 

XXII. 

1. 

470n. 

t( 

2. 

413b,*  467u. 

(1 

3. 

367b.*417b, 

•' 

3. 

492a. 

t( 

3. 

413b.* 

491c. 

11 

4. 

492a. 

i( 

4-6. 

463b.*  475c, 

11 

8. 

483b,    487a. 

11 

6. 

467n. 

48-4a,*485cn.* 

11 

9. 

227c,  391  be* 

It 

6. 

2411).* 

u 

4. 

239n,  463c, 

11 

9- 

-11. 

488b. 

11 

7. 

241b,*  4U7n. 

484b.* 

11 

10. 

183c,  184b, 

11 

10. 

241b,*  407n, 

<( 

5. 

455a. 

391bc,*436a. 

466c,*  487a. 

11 

7. 

481a,  498c. 

11 

12. 

383c. 

11 

12. 

241b,*  466c. 

<l 

7-10. 

486a. 

11 

14. 

227c,*  383c, 

11 

14. 

363a,    491c. 

<( 

8. 

382a. 

395c.* 

It 

16. 

122c. 

<l 

11. 

394b,  473n, 

r 

16. 

361c,  491c. 

t< 

20. 

241b,*  466c.* 

489n,  594a. 

• 

18. 

121b. 

-1 


GEI^EEAL    INDEX. 


The  different  sections  of  the  pages  are  designated  as  in  the  preceding  Index  of  Scripture 
Texts  (see  page  753).  The  sign  +  denotes  that  the  subject  referred  to  is  continued  beyond  the 
page  designated. 


Aaron  Ben  Asher,  620a. 

Aben  Ezra,  621bc+. 

Abrabanel,  625c. 

Abul  J'araj  Aaron,  619b. 

Accadians,  29a. 

Aceadian  Hymn,  30c. 

Accommodation  Theory,  166bc. 

Accommodation,  False  and  True,  51 1+. 

Adi-Granth,  the,  66n. 

Adler,  700a. 

Africanus,  644c. 

"         quoted,  622bc. 
Agricola.  6  7  9a. 
Ainsworth,  686c. 
Akiba,  609n. 

Albert  of  Ratisbon,  667a. 
Alberti,  697c. 
Alcuin,  662bc. 
Alexander,  J.  A.,  733c. 

"  "       against  Lowth,  95a. 

"  "       quoted,  555b. 

"  "       work  referred  to,  389n. 

Alexander,  W.  L.,  728c. 

"       quoted,  505. 
Alexandria,  a  Literary  Centre,  117 
"  many  Jew.s  in,  118a. 

School  of,  637+. 
Alexandrian  Codex,  131b,  136a. 
Alford,  208b.  729b. 

quoted,    239c.    285c,    310b,   367n, 
435c,  439b,  459n,  466n,  476n,  485n, 
526C+,  591a. 
Allegorical  Interpretation,  163,  630e. 

Gforeron,  611a. 
Allegory,  302+. 

of  Paul,  321+. 
Allen,  on  Year-day  Theory,   383n,  388n, 

390b. 
Alphabetical  Poems,  100b. 
Alphonsus  of  Aleala,  672c. 
Alphonsus  Zamora,  672c. 
Altar  of  Incense,  365ab. 
"      the  Great,  565c+. 
Alter,  700a. 
Alting,  691b. 
Ambrose,  655bc. 
American  exegetes,  732c+. 
Ammon,  714a. 
Amoraim,  the,  616n. 


Analogy  of  Faith,  579+. 

Analogous  Imagery  in  Apocalyptics,  417. 

Anderson  on  Norse  Mythology,  63n. 

Andreas,  652c,  661c. 

Angel  of  Jehovah,  588a. 

Anthony  of  Nebrissa,  672b. 

Anthropomorphism,  103. 

Antiquities.  155a. 

Antioch,  School  of,  644bc+. 

Antithesis,  Use  of,  184c. 

Apocalypse,  Date  of,  237+. 

"  Interpretation  of,  466+. 

"  Plan  of,  467bc. 

Apocryphal  Books,  501a. 
Apologetic  Interpretation,  I7lc+. 
Apostasy,  the,  460a. 
Apostrophe,  252a. 
Aquinas,  190n,  666b. 
Aramaic  Language,  74c+,  107+. 
Arethas,  652c,  661c. 
Aretius,  678c. 

Ariel,  Symbolic  Name,  392c. 
Aristobulus,  610bc. 
Arius,  646c. 
Armlnius,  689bc. 
Arnald,  701a. 
Arnold,  Edwin,  42n. 
Assumed  Comparisons,  256c+. 
Assyrian  Sacred  Books,  28c+. 
Astruc,  7 14b. 

Athanasian  Creed,  quoted,  588c+. 
Athanasius,  651c. 
Atonement,  Vicarious,  590bc+. 
Attersoll,  687a. 
Attic  Dialect,  116bc. 
Atwater.  work    referred   to,    360n,   368n. 

393n,  395n. 
Auberlen,  727a. 

"         quoted,  427c+. 
Augustine,  657bc+. 

"  quoted,  272a. 

Avesta,  the,  25. 

Babel,  Confusion  of  Tongues  at,  71c. 

"      Chaklajan  Account  of,  33c. 
Babylon,  in  Prophecy,  414. 

"        Sacred  Records  of,  28c. 

"        Symbolical  Name,  391bc. 
Bacher,  work  referred  to,  616n. 


773 


GENERAL   INDEX. 


Baer,  work  referred  to,  13  In. 

Bahr,  727c. 

"      quoted,  357n,  381a. 

"     work  referred  to,  360u.  380n,  383n, 
393n,  395n. 
Barclay,  work  referred  to,  616n. 
mhrdt,  7 11  a. 
Barnabas,  Epistle  of,  631c. 
Barnes,  AUjert,  734ab. 

"  "        quoted,  418ii, 

Barrows,  quoted,  219n,  569a. 
Barsumas,  651b. 
Basil,  the  Great,  652a. 
Bivier,  G.  L.,  715a. 
Baur,  Bruno,  7 16a. 
Baur,  F.  C,  170c,  716bc. 
Baumgarten-Crusius,  724c. 
Baumgarten,  M.,  725c+. 
Bauragarten,  S.  J.,  709c+. 
Baxter,  687a. 
Beast,  Number  of,  269b. 
Beausobre,  697c. 
Bechai,  624c. 

Bede,  the  Venerable,  661c+. 
Bellermann,  work  referred  to,  90n. 
Belshazzar,  419an. 
Bengel,  152b,  699bc. 

"       quoted,  294an,  341c,  445a,  460n, 
497bc,  506a. 

"       work  referred  to,  390n. 
Benson,  728b. 
Bentley,  699a. 
Berleburg  Bible,  709c. 
Bernard,  quoted,  576n+,  577bc. 
"        work  referred  to,  578n. 
Bertheau,  720c. 

"         work  referred  to,  389n. 
Bertholdt,  721a. 
Beza,  677c+. 
Bible,  Literature  of,  24. 

"      a  self-interpreting  Book,  222b. 

"      False  notions  of,  499. 

"      Compared  with  Ethnic  Bibles,  66-68. 
Biblia  Magna,  C88c. 
Biblia  Maxima,  688c. 
Birch,  work  referred  to,  54bn. 
Birch,  700a. 
Bisping,  737b. 
Bissel,  727c. 
Blair,  (quoted,  256bc. 
Blayney,  703a. 

Bleek,  A.  H.,  work  referred  to,  25n. 
Block,  F.,  723CH-. 

"       "    quoted,  124ab,  471n,  626b. 

"       "    work  referred  to,  108a. 
Blood,  Avenging  of,  528ab. 

"       Svmboli.-im  of,  358. 
Bloomfield,  728c. 
Blount,  704a. 
Bochart,  689a. 

Bofhl,  work  referred  to,  SOln. 
Biittcher,  work  referred  to,  79ii. 


Body,  as  house  of  soul,  183bc+. 
Bolingbroke,  705a. 
Bonaventura,  666c+. 
Bopp,  quoted,  79n. 
Botta,  28n. 
Braune,  727c. 

"        quoted,  262n. 
Breithaupt,  work  referred  to,  620n. 
Brown,  731c. 

Brown,  D.,  quoted,  486n,  599c. 
Browne,  quoted,  587c-r-. 
Bruccioli,  680b. 
Bucer,  678a. 

Buddha's  Discourses,  specimens  of,  42-45. 
Buddhism,  Doctrines  of,  42b. 
Buddhist  Canon,  40+. 
Bugenhagen,  678a. 
Bull,  687b. 
BuUinger,  678c. 

Bunsen,  work  referred  to,  54bn. 
Burgensis,  Paul,  668a. 
Burkitt,  702b. 

Burnouf,  work  referred  to,  25n. 
Bush,  George,  734a. 
Butler,  705a. 
Buttmann,  726b. 

"  work  referred  to,  209n,  507n. 

Buxtorf,  683a. 
Bynasus,  691b. 
Bythner,  687a. 

Cabala,  the.  621bn. 
Ccesarea.  School  of,  642c+. 
Calixtus,  691a. 
Calmet,  697c. 
Calovius,  690c+. 
Calvin,  676bc+. 

"       quoted,  571q. 
Caraerarius,  678b. 
Campbell,  702c. 

Candlestick,  Golden,  350b,  364c. 
Canon,  the  Christian,  24. 
Canticles,  Interpretation  of,  324+. 
Cappel,  OSSa,  688b. 
Capporcth,  the,  o62ab. 
Carlstadt,  679a. 
Caryl,  687a. 
Casaubon,  688a. 

Cassel,  quoted,  263n,  268n,  269a. 
Cassiodorus,  659b. 
Castell,  684b. 
Castellio,  678c. 
Catenists,  the,  661bc+. 
Cave,  quoted,  344c. 

"      work  referred  to,  359n. 
Celerier,  quoted,  17c. 

work  referred  to,  ISn,  5Sln. 
Chaldee  Language,  75a,  107+. 
Chalmers,  J.,  quoted,  4 tie. 

"  "    work  referred  to,  47n. 

Chandler,  K.,  7n5a. 
Cliandler,  S.,  7U2b. 


GENERAL   INDEX. 


773 


Charlemagne,  662b. 

Chasdim,  the,  10'7cn+. 

Cherubim,  the,  362c+. 

Chiliasm  in  Early  Church,  636n+. 

China,  Sacred  Books  of,  46+. 

Chronology,  155a. 

Chrysostora,  64:8bc+. 

Chubb,  704c. 

Church,  New  Test,  meaning  of,  176bc+. 

Clarius,  676b. 

Clarke,  Adam,  728b. 

Clarke,  J.  F.,  quoted,  40c+. 

Claudius  of  Turin,  664a. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  638+. 

"  "        quoted,  163c+,  561b. 

Clement  of  Rome,  631b. 
Clement,  Recognitions  of,  quoted,  538n. 
Clericus,  696ab. 
Clermont  Codex,  136ab. 
Cocceius,  69 1+. 

Cochran,  work  referred  to,  417n. 
Ctielestius,  658b. 
Coke,  T.,  702a. 
Colani,  717a. 

Colebrook,  work  referred  to,  39n. 
Colenso,  quoted,  519an. 
Collins,  704a. 

Colours,  Symbolism  of,  393+. 
Comparison  of  Prophecies,  41 6+. 
Conant,  735a. 

"        quoted,  329b. 
Condillac,  705b. 
Confucius,  48c. 

Connexion  of  Thought,  various,  219b. 
Context,  Use  of,  182a. 

"         defined,  210b. 

"         illustrated,  214c+. 
Convbeare,  John,  705a. 
Conybeare,  W.  J.,  732b. 

"  work  referred  to,  235n. 

Cook,  F.  C,  731c. 
Cornelius  a  Lapide,  693a. 
Coronel,  672c. 

Cottle,  work  referred  to,  63n. 
Coverdale,  681a. 
Cowles,  734c. 

"       quoted,  351n,  376a,  386n. 

"        work  referred  to,  386n,  425n,  491n. 
Crabb,  quoted,  334b. 
Craven,  on  Symbols,  348n. 
Creation,  Chaldee  account  of.  31c+. 

"         Mosaic  narrative  of,  544+. 
Cremer,  123n. 

quoted,  199cn+,  302n. 

"        work  referred  to,  200n,  2.02n. 
Critici  Sacri,  the,  684c+. 
Criticism,  Textual,  129+. 

"  distinguished   from    Hermeneu- 

tics,  19b. 
Curcellffius,  690b. 
Currey,  quoted,  434b,  435bc. 
Cyprian,  654b. 


Cyril  of  Alexandria,  444a. 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  652b. 

Da  Costa,  work  referred  to,  560n. 
Daniel,  Chaldee  portions  of,  109ab. 
"       Service  in  Babylon,  113b. 
"        Visions  of  Empire,  418+. 
Darmesteter,  quoted,  25c,  28b. 

"  work  referred  to,  25n. 

Davenant,  687b. 

David,  as  Symbolical  Name,  392b. 
Davids,  work  referred  to,  44n. 
Davidson,  729a. 

"  quoted,  203c+,  220,  222ab,  281n, 

303n,  327a,  503n,  513c,  654n, 
665a,  679b. 

"  work    referred    to,    18n,    129n, 

494n,  50ln. 
Davison,  quoted,  405n. 
Dead,  Egyptian  Book  of,  53+. 
De  Dieu,  683c. 
Deism,  English,  703c+. 
De  la  Haye,  688c. 
Delitzsch,  727b. 

"  quoted,  146c,  147a,  254c,  358bc, 

397c,  402n,  617. 

"  work  referred  to,  401n. 

Deluge,  Chaldaean  account  of,  33c. 

"        not  universal,  541c+. 
De  Rossi,  698c. 
De  Saulcy,  28n. 
Descartes,  705b. 
Desprez,  quoted,  419n,  448c. 
Deutsch,  work  referred  to,  615n. 
De  Wette,  152b,  208b,  719. 

"  work  referred  to,  90n. 

Dhammapada,  quoted,  45. 
Dialects,  Greek,  115c+. 
Diderot,  705b. 
Dietrich,  693c+. 
Diodati,  680b. 
Diodorus  of  Tarsus,  646c+. 
Diognetus,  632c. 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  642a. 
Discrepancies  of  Scripture,  514+. 
Doctrine,  Progress  of,  in  Bible,  566+. 

"         may  be  taught  by  J'igures,  593+, 
Doctrinal  Use  of  Scripture,  582+. 
Dodd,  702a. 
Doddridge,  702a. 
DiJderlein,  698c. 
Doedes,  quoted,  20n,  230n,  S95n. 

"        work  referred  to,  18n. 
Dogmatic  Interpretation,  171  c+. 
Doring,  668a. 

Dorner,  quoted,  583n,  635c+,  650c. 
Dorotheus,  645ab. 
Dort,  Canon  of,  quoted,  590b.  • 

"      Synod  of,  689b,  691c. 
Double" Sense,  Theory  of,  493be+. 
Dreams,  396+. 
Driver,  work  referred  to,  83n. 


774 


GENERAL   INDEX. 


Drusius,  683c. 

"        work  referred  to,  501n. 
Druthmar,  663c+. 
Ducas,  672b. 

Dudley,  work  referred  to,  368ii. 
Duperron,  25b. 
Diisterdieck,  726c. 

"  work  referred  to,  427n. 

D  wight,  B.  F.,  ciuoted   176a. 

Eadie,  730c+. 

"      quoted,  264e. 
Eber,  Father  of  Hebrews,  76c. 
Ebiouism,  affecting  Interpretation,  636c. 
Euclesiastes,  Date  and  Authorship  of,  105. 

Plan  of,  221b. 
Ecstasy,  Prophetic,  39ybc+. 
Eddas,"the,  62+. 
Edelmann,  711a. 
Eden,  Land  of,  550. 
Edersheim,  work  referred  to,  480n. 
Edessa,  School  of,  65(»b. 
Egypt,  Sacred  Books  of,  53b. 

"       as  a  Symbi.>!ical  Xame,  391a. 
Eichhorn,  713c+. 
Elias  Levita,  626c. 
Ellicott,  208b,  730b. 

quoted,  322a,  454bc,  455c+,  457a, 
459n,  464b,  607c. 
Elliott,  work  referred  to,  147n. 
Elliott,  E.  B.,  732b. 

"        work  referred  to,  386n. 
Elliott,  C,  work  referred  to,  583n. 
Elliott  and  Harsha,  work  referred  to,  18n. 
End  of  the  Age,  441. 
Engclhardt,  work  referred  to,  380n. 
English  Version,  Authorized,  681b,  683c. 

"  "        Revised,  736c+. 

Enigma,  270c+. 

Enthusiasm  in  Interpretation,  157a. 
Enzinas,  680b.  . 

Ephraim  Svrus,  651a. 
Codex,  136a. 
Epiphanius,  651c-|-. 
Episcopius,  690a. 
Erasmus,  670c+. 
Erncsti,  707c+. 

"        work  referred  to,  18n. 
Eschatology  of  (iospels,  438+. 
"  Pauline,  454+. 

"  Sunmiary  of  X.  Test.,  492bc+. 

Estius,  688c. 

Eternal  Punishment,  59U'+. 
Etymology,  Value  of,  175c+. 
Eusebius  of  Ctcsarea,  643c. 

quoted,  559n,  6 10c,  637n. 
Eusebius  of  Emesa,  646c. 
Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  645c. 
Eustathiiis,  646b. 
Eutiiyniius  Zigabenus,  665c+. 
Ewal'd,  722. 

"       quoted,  310c. 


Ewald,  work  referred  to,  83n,  90n. 
Exegesis  distinct  from  Hermeneutics,  19c. 
Exodus,  Analysis  of,  212c+. 
Ezekiel,  Analysis  of,  432+. 
Ezra,  the  Scribe,  604bc+. 
"      Chaldee  portions  of,  109c. 

Faber,  quoted,  474n. 

Fable,  Character  of,  265c,  267c. 

Fagius,  678b. 

Fairbairn,  quoted,  342c+,  346bn,  357b, 
359b,  361n,  363n,  365,  406bc,  407n, 
4i»9c+,  412n,  413ab,  415n,  433c,  521n. 

Fairbairn,  work  referred  to,  18n. 

Farrar,  quoted,  478n,   t)94b,  704n,  709n, 
712b,  717c,  71Sb. 
"        work  referred  to,  267n. 

Fathers,  Apostolic,  63 1+. 

"        the  Ancient,  as  exegetes,  636bcn+, 
660bc. 

Fausset,  731c. 

Fay,  727c. 
"     quoted,  541c. 

Figurative  Language,  243+. 

"  "       may  teach  doctrine,  593. 

Figures  of  Thought,  248b. 

Figures  of  Words,  248b. 

Fisher,  quoted,  535n,  536ac+,  537n,  682b. 

Flacius,  679b. 

Flatt,  723b. 

Florus  Magister.  664a. 

Forbes,  work  referred  to,  18n. 

Form  essential  to  Poetry,  92c. 

Franck,  work  referred  to,  62 In. 

Francke,  A.  H.,  165n,  7t»6a. 

Frederick  the  Great,  704bc. 

Friedrick,  work  referred  to,  360n. 

Free  Thought  in  17tii  Cefttury,  694bc. 

French  lutidolity,  703c,  705b. 

French  Rationalism,  717a. 

Fritzsche,  724c. 

Fronmiiller,  727c. 

Furst,  work  referred  to,  GlSn,  619n,  624n. 

Gabler,  714c. 

Gaillard.  688c. 

Galatians,  Structure  of  Epistle  to,  152a. 

Gaonim,  61 6n. 

Gardiner,  735a. 

"         quoted,  135c,  565n. 

"         work  referred  to,  554rL 
Gataker,  686c. 
Gathas,  the,  26c. 
(Jcbliardt,  quoted,  481n+. 
Geier,  694a. 

Geikie,  quoted,  20n,  300c,  542b. 
Gemara,  see  Talmud. 
Genealogies,  A'alue  of,  524. 

of  our  Lord,  521+. 
Genesis,  Analysis  of,  211c+. 

"         a  series  of  Evolutions,  567. 
Gerlach,  724b. 


GENERAL  INDEX. 


775 


Gershonides,  see  Levi  Ben  Gershom. 
Gerson,  669a. 
Gesenius,  V21c+. 

"  quoted,  790,  85n. 

"         work  referred  to,  75n,  85n,  392c. 
Gforer,  quoted,  611a. 
Gill,  702b. 
Ginsburg,  732c. 

"  quoted,  609ab,  619bc. 

"  work  referred  to,   606n,   608n. 

609n,  621n,  627n. 
Girdlestone,  work  referred  to,  202n. 
Giustiniaui,  672b. 
Glasgow,  quoted,  480n+. 

"        work  referred  to,  241n,  467n,  491ii. 
Glassius,  693c. 

"        work  referred  to,  281n. 
Gloag,  731a. 

"       work  referred  to,  409n. 
Glossolaly,  402bc+. 
Gnosticism   affecting   Christian   Thought, 

636c. 
Goddeau,  688b. 
Godet,  208b,  728a. 

"       quoted,  444n,  464c. 
Godwin,  687b. 
Gog,  Battle  of,  435bc. 
Gomar,  689b. 
Goodwin,  John,  687b. 
Goodwin,  Thomas,  687b. 
Gospels,  Harmony  and  Diversity  of,  553+. 
Gouldman,  684c. 
Grammatico-Historical  Interpretation,  173, 

203. 
Grassmann,  quoted,  35bc. 
Graves,  work  referred  to,  569n. 
Greek  Language,  73c,  114+. 
Green,  W.,  703a. 

Green,  W.  H.,  quoted,  326bc,  327n. 
Gregory,  D.  S.,  work  referred  to,  560n. 
Gregory  the  Great,  659c+. 
Gregory  of  Nazianzum,  652b. 
Gregory  of  Nyssa,  652a. 
Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  643a. 
Griesbach,  700b. 

"  quoted,  134cn. 

Grimnis-mal,  the,  64b. 
Grotius,  690c. 

"        quoted,  403n. 
Guyot,  quoted,  546a. 

Hackett,  735a. 

Hagadah,  606b+. 

Hagenbach,  quoted,  485n,   584n,   707c+, 

710c. 
Hahn,  737b. 

"      article  referred  to,  174n. 
Halachah,  6061)+. 
Haley,  work  referred  to,  532bn. 
Hammond,  686b. 
Hajjiix  legomcna,  179+. 
Hardwick,  quoted,  39bc. 


Hardwick,  work  referred  to,  40n. 
Hardy,  work  referred  to,  4 In,  42n. 
Harless,  737b. 

Harmonies,  Use  of  Gospel,  554+. 
Hartmami,  714c. 
Hase,  quoted,  660a,  669b. 
Hate,  Scripture  sense  of,  224+. 
Haug,  work  referred  to,  25n. 
Hava-mal,  the,  64b. 
Haven,  G.,  quoted,  148n. 
Hilvernick,  723c. 
Haymo,  663b. 

Hebraisms  in  New  Testament,  124c+. 
Hebraists,  the,  119bcn+. 
Hebrew  Language,  76+. 
Parallelism,  95+. 

"        Poetry,  90+. 

"        Rhymes,  100bc+. 
Heiligstedt,*720c. 
Heinrichs,  707b. 
Heinsius,  691a. 
Hellenes,  the,  115b. 
Hellenists,  the,  118p. 
Hellenistic  Greek,  118c+. 
Henderson,  728c. 
Hendewerk,  737b. 
Hengstenberg,  723bc. 

"  quoted,   293a,   369c,   374c, 

375b,  379b,  416n. 
"  work  referred  to,  409n. 

Henke,  714a. 
Henry,  701c+. 
Herder,  709a. 

"        work  referred  to,  90n. 
Hernias,  Shepherd  of,  632c. 
Hermes,  god  of  Arts,  17n. 
Hervey,  quoted,  523bc+. 

"        work  referred  to,  524n. 
Herzog,  work  referred  to,  360n.  • 
Hesychius,  642c. 
Hexapla,  the,  640b. 
Heyne,  714c. 
Hibbard,  quoted,  233b+. 
High  Priest,  type  of  Christ,  366bc+. 
Hilary  of  Poitiers,  655a. 
Hilgenfeld,  716c. 

"  work  referred  to,  404n,  427n. 

Hincks,  28n. 
Hippolytus,  653bc. 
Hirzel,  720c. 

Historical  Standpoint,  23 1+. 
History,  knowledge  of,  needed  in  Exposi- 
tion, 154c. 
Hitchcock,  article  referred  to,  B36n. 
Hitzig,  720c,  721a. 
Hodge,  734a. 

Hoffmann,  Andreas.  723a. 
Hofmann,  work  referred  to,  498n. 
Holmes,  quoted,  627a. 
Holy  of  Holies,  Symbols  of,  361c+. 
Homik'tics,  to  be  based  on  correct  Inter- 
pretation, 600. 


76 


GENERAL   INDEX. 


Home,  729a. 

"        quoted,  510c. 

"        work  referred  to,  129n,  49-in,  501n, 
502u. 
Hort,  736c. 

••      quoted,  132n,  588n. 
Hosea's  Marriage,  real,  373c+. 
Hottinger,  691b. 
Houbigant,  698a. 
Howson,  732b. 

quoted,  235bc,  461d. 
Hug,  724b. 

Plugo  of  St.  Caro,  667a. 
Human  Element  in  the  Scriptures,  138c+, 

709a. 
Hume,  705a. 
Hupfeld,  722c+. 
Hurd,  quoted.  688a. 
Hurst,  quoted,  706a,  7llc+. 
Huss,  -6680. 
Huther,  726c. 
Hutter,  681c. 
Hyperbole,  253b. 

Ibas,  651b. 

Ibn  Balaam,  623c. 

Ibu  Caspi,  624n. 

Ibn  Chajim,  626b. 

Ibn  Danan,  625b. 

Ibn  Giath,  623c. 

Ignatius.  631c+. 

Imagination  in  Interpretation,  152c. 

Immer,  quoted,  166n,  222a,  692c. 

"       work  referred  to,  18n,  126n. 
Incense,  Altar  of,  365ab. 
Inscriptions,  Monumental,  29b. 
Inspiration  of  Scripture,  137+. 
Interpretations,  Origin  of  various,  603c. 
Interrogation,  252c. 
Introduction,  Biblical,  distinct  from  Her- 

nieueutics,  19a. 
loniaus,  the,  116a. 
Ireiueus,  635bc+. 

"        on  date  of  Apocalypse,  237b+. 

"         quoted,  558c+. 
Irony,  253c. 
Isaac  Ben  Judali,  623c. 
Isagogics,  see  Introduction. 
Ishmael  Ben  Elisa,  608n. 
Isidore  of  Pelusium,  649b. 

Jablonski,  698a. 

Jackson,  Arthur,  687a. 

Jacob,  words  with  Laban,  91c+. 

"       dying  Prophecy,  99bc+. 

"       Dream  at  Bethel,  397c+. 

"       Family  Register,  516+. 
Jacob  Ben  Nnphtali,  620a. 
Jacobus,  734b. 
Jahn,  698c. 
Jamieson,  731c. 
Japheth  Ben  Ali,  619c. 


Jasher,  Book  of,  640c+, 
Jchoash's  Fable,  266c+. 
Jephthah's  daughter,  206+. 
Jerome,  656+. 

"        quoted.  639c. 
Jerusalem,  as  Symbolical  Name,  391bc 
Jeshua  Ibn  Sadal,  619b. 
Jewish  Exegesis,  603+. 
Jezirah,  Book  of,  621bn. 
Joachim,  666a. 

Job.  Date  and  Authorship,  105. 
Joel,  the  oldest  Apocalypse,  428c. 

"     Analysis  of,  429c+. 
John,  First  Epistle,  Date  of,  24 In. 
Jonathan  Ben  Uzziel,  614bc. 
Jonathan,  Pseudo,  614c. 
Jones,  Sir  William,  quoted,  25a. 
Josephus,  quoted,  410b,  451b,  472a,  479n,. 
482n,  6n7a. 
"  works  referred  to,  448bn,  476n. 

Joshua  Ben  Judah,  621a. 
Jotham's  Fable,  266a. 
Jowett,  732a. 

"        quoted,  323n. 
Judae  Leo,  680c. 

Judgment,  Scriptural  Doctrine  of,  449c+. 
Junius,  679c. 

Justification,  Paul  and  James  on,  528+. 
Justinian  of  Corsica,  672b. 
Justin  Martyr,  633c+. 

Kapila,  Philosophy  of,  40c. 
Kant,  712. 
"      on  Interpretation,  167b. 
"      work  referred  to,  167u. 
Kalisch,  732b. 
Karaites,  the,  618bc+. 
Keil,  K.  A.  G.,  708c. 

"  "         work  referred  to,  203an. 

Keil,  K.  F.,  727b. 

quoted,  108c,  351n,  358a,  377n+,. 

396bc,  420an,  432b,  436c+. 
work   referred  to,  359n,  360n, 
389n,  513n. 
Keim,  article  referred  to,  404n. 
Kennicott,  698b. 

Khammurabi,  Inscription  of  29c+. 
Khordah-Avesta,  28a. 
Kimchi,  David,  624b. 
"        Joseph,  624a. 
"        Moses,  624ab. 
King,  the  Five,  49+. 
Kitto,  728c. 
"       Cyclopaedia  quoted,  7611. 

referred  to,  608n,  609n, 
615n,  616n,  621n,  623n,  627n. 
"       Journal  of  Sac.  Lit.  quoted,  430n. 

ref.  to,  son,  83n. 
Klausen,  work  referred  to,  18n. 
Kleinert,  727c. 

Kliefoth,  work  referred  to,  380n. 
Kling,  727c. 


((         (1 


it  u 


GENERAL   INDEX. 


777 


Kling,  work  referred  to,  404n. 

Kiiapp,  7355. 

Knobel,  720c,  721a. 

K511ner,  737b. 

Koppe,  707b. 

Koran,  the,  57+. 

Kostlin,  716c. 

Kiihner,  work  referred  to,  11 5n. 

Kuinoel,  721b. 

Kurtz,  727a. 

"       quoted,  366n. 

"       work  referred  to,  359n,  380n. 
Kypke,  697c. 

Laban,  Speech  of,  91  be. 
Lachmann,  735e+. 
Lamech,  Song  of,  270ab. 
Lammert,  work  referred  to,  380n. 
Lampe,  695c+. 
Lanfranc.  665b. 
Lange,  Joachim,  709b. 
Lange,  J.  P.,  727c. 

"  quoted,  162n,  216b,  286n, 
320abn,  341b,  439c+,  487n, 
509n. 

"  "       work  referred  to,  18n,  427n, 

428n. 
Laniado,  626bc. 
Languages,  Origin  and  Growth  of,  69+. 

Famines  of,  73+. 
Laotsze,  46a. 

Lardner,  work  referred  to,  645n. 
Laud,  687c. 
Laver,  the,  365c+. 
Leathes,  work  i-eferred  to,  409n. 
Le  Clerc,  696a. 
Lechler,  727c. 

Lee  on  Lispiration  quoted,  142c. 
Lcfovre,  670b. 

Legge,  quoted,  47bc,  48c+,  52c+. 
Le'ighton,  686c. 
Le  Jay,  684a. 
Leland,  705a. 
Lengerke,  714c.  721b. 

"  work  referred  to,  651n. 

Lenormant,  28n.  , 

Lessing,  711a. 
Leusden,  692c+ 

Leviathan,  as  SyraboHcal  Name,  392c. 
Levi  Ben  Gershom,  625a. 
Levita,  626c+. 
Lewin,  732b. 

"       quoted,  237n. 
Lewis,  Tayler,  94n. 

"  "       quoted,    68n,    103n,    144n, 

150bc,  307a,  308an. 

"       work  referred  to,  94n. 
Leydecker,  697b. 
Leyrer,  article  referred  to,  360ii. 
Libanius,  647c. 
Lightfoot,  John,  6S5c+. 

"  "      quoted,  447n. 


Lightfoot,  J.  B.,  730c. 

"  "      quoted,  323n. 

Limborch,  690b. 
Lisco,  quoted,  282n. 
Locke,  694c,  705b. 
Locusts,  Plague  of,  430n. 
Logos,  Philo  on  the,  612. 
Lombard,  see  Peter  Lombard. 
Lord,  D.  N.,  on  Symbols,  34  8n. 
Lowman,  701a. 
Lowth,  R.,  701b. 

"       "     work  referred  to,  90n. 
Lowth,  William,  701a. 
Lucian,  645c. 
Liicke,  719c+. 

"       quoted,  427a. 
Lumby,  quoted,  140n. 
Liinemann,  726b. 

quoted,  435b,  459n. 
Luthardt,  728a. 
Luther,  673+. 

"        quoted,  41 9n. 

"        Dispute  of,  with  Zwingle,  682. 
Lyra,  Nicholas  de,  667bc+. 

Macdonald,  quoted,  240b. 
Macknight,  702c. 

"  work  referred  to,  o54n. 

Mahan,  quoted,  518n. 
Maimonides,  622c+. 
Maldonatus,  680a. 
Mr.Uet,  work  referred  to,  63n. 
Malta,  Vipers  in,  237n. 
Man  of  Sin,  460bc+. 
Manuscripts,  Uncial  and  Cursive,  131ab. 
Marloratus,  679c4-. 
Marsh,  quoted,  337c,  345b. 
Martensen,  quoted,  584n. 
Martin,  Sir  W.,  quoted,  82bc. 
Masoretes,  work  of,  79c,  130bc. 
Matthai,  700a. 
Maurer,  720c. 
Maurus,  Rhabanus,  663a. 

"  "  quoted,  164c. 

M'Call,  quoted,  406n. 

"        work  referred  to,  624n. 
M'Clintock  and  Strong,  Cycloppedia,  729a. 
"  "        quoted,  167n. 

"  "        referred  to,  608n, 

615n,  616n,  619n,  621n,  623a,  628n. 
Meehilta,  608n. 
Mede,  688a. 

"      quoted,  464n. 
Medes,  Prominence  of,  in  Scripture,  422b. 
Meisner,  698c. 
Melanchthon,  674+. 
Melchizedek,  type  of  Christ,  341c+. 
Melito,  635a. 
Menant,  28n. 
Mendelssohn,  627c+. 
Menochius,  688b. 
Mercyseat,  the,  362. 


r-r-Q 


GENERAL   INDEX. 


Merivale.  work  referred  to,  46 In. 

Merx,  work  referred  to,  429n. 

3Iessianic  Psalms,  670c. 

Metals,  Symbolism  of,  395. 

Metaphor,  258bc-f-. 

Metonymy,  248c+. 

Meuschen,  697a. 

Meyer,  G.  W.,  work  referred  to,  18n,  668n, 

669n,  696n. 
Mever,  H.  A.  W.,  208b,  726bc+. 

"  quoted,  180c,  262n,  271a, 

273c,  295c,  298n,  300n,  312c,  317n,  321c, 

337n,    406b,    407b,    441n,   442n,    445n, 

447b,  463n,  464b,  490n,  528n,  579n. 
Meyrick,  quoted,  428c+. 
Mii-haelis,  C.  B.,  7o6b. 
Michaelis,  J.  D.,  706c+. 

"  work  referred  to,  569n. 

Michaelis,  J.  F.,  707a. 
Michaelis,  J.  (J.,  707a. 
Michaelis,  J.  H.,  698a,  706b. 
Middle  Ages,  Exegesis  of,  661+. 
Midrashim,  Oi)7bc-f-. 
Millennium,  390bc,  484bc,  487bc4-. 
Mill,  W.  H.,  work  referred  to,  524n. 
Mill,  J.,  69'.)a. 
Miller,  William.  389c. 
Mills,  work  referred  to,  368n. 
Milton,  694c. 

"        quoted,  93c. 
Miracles,  534bc+. 

"        to  be  literally  interpreted,  205c-i-. 
Mirandula,  671  c+. 
Mishna,  see  Talmud. 
Mohammed,  57c+. 
Moldenhauer,  700a. 
Moll,  727c. 

Monasteries  as  Seats  of  Learning,  661a. 
Moral  Interpretation,  167b. 
Morgan,  704c.  " 

Morison,  731b. 

Mosaic  Code,  Humaneness  of,  569b. 
Mosheim,  707a. 
Muiuischer,  rinotod,  336b. 
Muir,  (jnoted,  t'>lc4-. 

"      work  referi'ed  to,  39n. 
Midler,  Max,  quoted,  34c,  40b,  67n,  244b. 

a  ti     Translation  of  Vedic  Hymn, 

36,  38c +. 

"  "      work  referred  to,  40n,  41n, 

45n. 
Mnnk,  619c. 
Munster,  676a. 
Murphy,  7311). 
Muscuius,  678c. 

Mystical  Interpretation,  164bc+. 
Mythical  Interpretation,  16Sc+,  714c+. 

Nagelsbach,  727c. 

"  quoted,  51  On. 

Xames,  Symbolical,  391+. 
Nast,  735a. 


Xast,  quoted,  218a,  229b,  440n. 
Natalis,  659c. 

Naturalistic  Interpretation,  168ab. 
Neander,  718c. 

•'         quoted,  530a,  643ab,  646a,  648b, 
655a,  660n,  661n,  689c. 

"         work  referred  to,  404n,  636n. 
Nehemiah,  work  of,  605bc+. 
Nepos,  642a. 

Nero,  Man  of  Sin,  460c+. 
Netherlands,  the,  689a. 
Newcome,  702c+. 

"  work  referred  to,  554n. 

New  Testament  must  be  explained  by  help 

of  the  Old,  598. 
Nicetas.  665b. 
Nicolai.  711a. 
Niebuhr,  706c. 

Nile,  River,  in  Mythology,  55a. 
Nisibis,  School  of,  650bc,  651b. 
Nonnius,  672b. 
Nordheimer,  ((uoted,  81n.  620a. 

"  work  referred  to,  85n,  89n. 

Nork,  work  referred  to,  368n. 
Norris,  28n. 
Norton,  734a. 

"        ((uoted,  590n. 
Norzi,  626a. 
Numbers.  Symbolical,  380+. 

Qlcolampadius,  675c. 

QKcumenius,  664b. 

01denl)erg,  work  referred  to,  41lL 

Olearius,  693b. 

Olivetan,  68()b. 

Oppert,  28n. 

Olshausen.  H.,  725bc. 

Olshauseni  J.,  720c. 

Olympiodorus,  661c. 

Origen,  639bc+. 

"        quoted,  560n. 
Osgood,  cjuoted,  656+. 
Osiander,  678b. 

Osiris,  Egyptian  Legend  of,  54c+. 
Owen,  John,  687c+. 
Owen,  John  J.,  734b. 

Pagninus,  Sanctes,  672a. 

Palmer,  E.  IL,  work  referred  to,  57n. 

Pamphilas,  643ab. 

Parables,  Interpretation  of,  276+. 

Parallelism,  Hebrew,  91+. 

Parallel  Passages,  Comparison  of,  186bc+, 

22 1+. 
Paulus,  168ab,  714a. 
Parcau,  work  referred  to,  18n. 
Parousia,  the.  Coincident  with  the  Fall  of 

Jerusalem,  45()c+,  458. 
Paser,  ()93c. 
I'atrick,  700c. 
Patristic  Exegesis,  General  Character  of, 

660. 


GENERAL  INDEX. 


779 


Pearoe,  Z.,  7020. 

Pearson,  684c. 

Pfccaut,  VlYa. 

Pelagius,  658b. 

Pellican,  675c+. 

Pemble,  686c. 

Pentecost,  Miracle  of,  403bc. 

Pentateuch,  Criticism  of,  714bc. 

Peter  Lombard,  665c. 

Peter  Martyr  (I),  642c 

Peter  Martyr  (II),  678b. 

Peter,  the  Stone,  225c+. 

Pcrowne,  731b. 

Persia,  Sacred  Records  of,  28c. 

Personfication,  251b. 

Pharisaism,  Origin  of,  606a. 

Growth  of,  607a. 
Pfeiffer,  Aug.,  694a. 
Phelps,  quoted,  23n. 
Philippi,  F.  A.,  726a. 

"         quoted,  406n+. 
Philo  Jud;fus,  61 1+. 

quoted,  163b,  612c4-. 
Philology,  Comparative,  Uses  of,  in  Inter- 

l)retation,  lo5c,  178bc. 
Philosophy,  German,  712. 
Pick,  quoted,  628a. 
Pierce,  B.  K.,  quoted,  598n. 
Pierius,  642b. 
Pietism,  Degenerate,  709c. 
Pietistic  Interpretation,  165c. 
Piscator,  679c. 

Plan  of  a  Book  to  be  studied,  210c+. 
Planck,  121an. 

"        quoted,  446n. 
Plumptre,  quoted,  329c. 

"  article  referred  to,  404a. 

Pocock,  686ab. 
Polano,  quoted.  615c. 
Polyglots,  the  First,  672b. 

""  Antwerp,  681bc. 

"  London,  684b. 

"  Nuremberg,  681c. 

"  Paris,  684a. 

Poole,  685ab. 

Pope,  quoted.  487n+,  596n. 
Porphyry,  652c+. 
Postilfa," defined,  667n. 
Pott,  707b. 
Prepossesions,  Freedom  from,  essential  to 

Interpreter,  595a. 
Pressense,  quoted,  632c+,  637b. 
Procopius  of  Gaza,  661c. 
Proof-texts,  how  to  be  used,  595c+. 
Prophecy,  Interpretation  of,  405+. 
Prosopopoeia,  25 In. 
Protestant    Principles    of    Interpretation, 

583ab. 
Proverbs,  defined,  328bc+. 

"  Interpretation  of,  330+. 

"  Dark,  269c. 

"  Plan  of  Book  of,  221a. 


Psalms,  Historical  Occasions  of,  238+. 
Psalter,  Theology  of,  570c. 
Pumbaditha,  School  of,  620a. 
Purists,  the,  119bn+. 
Pusey,  quoted,  41  In. 

Quakers,  Mystic  Pietism  of,  166a. 
Qualifications  of  an  Interpreter,  151+. 
Quesnel,  697c. 
Quotations,  Scripture,  500+. 

"  Rabbinical  formulas  of,  504n. 

Rabbinical  Exegesis,  6 18+. 

Radbert,  Paschasius,  664b. 

Ralbag,  625a. 

Rambam,  622c+. 

Rashi,  620bc. 

Rask,  work  referred  to,  63a. 

Rationalism,  German,  703c. 

"  Growth  of,  7l0c+. 

"  Scholarly  form  of,  711bc+. 

"  Service  of,  717b,  737b. 

Rawlinson,  28n. 

"  work  referred  to,  419n. 

Reason,  in  Interpretation,  153c. 

Redak,  624b. 

Reformation,  Exegesis  of,  673+. 

Reiche,  737b. 

Reineccius,  698a. 

Reitmayr,  737b. 

Reland,  696c. 

Remigius,  664a. 

Remonstrants,  689bc+. 

Renan,  171a,  717a. 

Renouf,  work  referred  to,  53n. 

Repetition  of  Dreams,  Visions,  and  Pro- 
phecies, 399a,  409+,  423b,  437c. 

Resurrection,  Doctrine  of,  594bc,  574c-j-. 
of  Dry  Bones,  349c+. 

Resurrections,    distinct    and    successive, 
463+. 

Reuchlin,  670b. 

Reuss,  737b. 
"      work  referred  to,  736n. 

Revelation,  distinct  from  Inspiration,  142c. 

Reville,  71 7a. 

Revival  of  Learning,  670a. 

Riddle,  the,  Characteristics  of,  268b. 
"       distinguishable  from  Enigma,  270c. 

Riehm,  work  referred  to,  409n,  49 In. 

Ritter,  work  referred  to,  61  In. 

Rivet,  688c. 

Robinson,  Edward,  733b. 

"  "         quoted,  440c. 

"  "        work  referred  to,  506n, 

513n,  554n. 

Rodwell,  work  referred  to,  57n. 

Roman  Church,  on  the  Interpretation  of 
Scripture,  682c+. 

Romans,  Plan  of  Epistle  to,  213c+. 

Rorison,  quoted,  547a.  548n. 

Rosenraiiller,  E.  F.  C,  72(Jb. 


780 


GENERAL   INDEX. 


Rosenmiiller,  J.  G.,  work  referred  to,  649n, 

658n,  G63n,  t)64n. 
Rossteuscher,  work  referred  to,  404ii. 
Rougemont,  717a. 
Rousseau,  704b. 
Riickert,  7371j. 
Rule,  work  referred  to,  6I811. 
Rupert,  665c. 
Ryle,  quoted,  493c 

Saadia,  619a. 

Saalschutz,  work  referred  to,  90rL 
Sal)oraiui,  the,  616n. 
Sadducees,  the,  G07a. 
Sakya-muui,  40. 
Sale,  work  referred  to,  57n. 
Salmeron,  work  referred  to,  281n. 
Salomon  Ben  Judah,  623c. 
Salomon  Ben  Melech,  627b. 
Samson's  Riddle,  268c. 
Sankya  Philosophy,  40c. 
Sanscrit  Language,  73c. 
Sargon,  Inscription  of,  30b. 
Savce,  28n. 

""       quoted,  29a,  33a. 
Scaliger,  683c.  ' 

Scattergood,  684c. 
Schaff,  P.,  727c+. 

"       "    quoted,    228c,     229n,     584n+, 
5861). 

"       "    work  referred  to,  241u,  267n, 
404n,  582n. 
Schenkel,  171a. 
Scherer,  717a. 
Schindler,  683b. 
Schleiermacher,  717c+. 

"  quoted,  161n. 

Schleusner,  724c. 
Schmid,  C.  F.,  723b. 
Schmid,  Sebastian,  694a. 
Schmidt,  Erasmus,  693c. 
Schmoller,  727c. 

"  quotfed,  323a,  375a. 

Schoettgen,  697a. 
Scholz,  735c. 
Schrader,  28n. 
Schroeder,  797c. 

"  quoted,  275n. 

Schultcns,  69C.bc. 
Schulthoss,  714a. 
Sehulz,  735c. 
Schwegler,  716c. 

Science,  Alleged  Contradictions  of,  533+. 
Scoi)e,  defined,  210b. 
Scott,  J.,  work  referred  to,  501n. 
Scott,  Thomas,  702b. 
Scribes,  the,  605a. 

Scriptures,  Ethnic,  to  be  examined,  23. 
Scrivener,  work  referred  to,  r29n. 
Scytliiaii  Languages,  73c. 
Sediilius,  (WUa. 
Seller,  work  referred  to,  18n. 


ISemler,  166hc,  710,  714c. 
Septuagint  Version,  llSb,  609c+. 
Serpent,  the  Brazen,  341. 
Sewal,  article  referred  to,  569ii. 
Shaftesbury,  704a. 
Sherlock,  705a. 

"         quoted,  590a. 
Showbread,  Table  of.  364b. 
Shedd,  735b. 
Shu,  the  Four,  52bc. 
Sibylline  Books,  65n. 
Sigfugson,  62c. 
Sikhs,  Scriptures  of  the,  66n. 
Simile,  254b+. 
Simon,  R.,  688b. 

Simpson,  work  referred  to,  360n. 
Simrock,  work  referred  to,  63n. 
Sinaitic  Codex,  131b,  136a. 
Slavery,  Scriptures  on,  580bc+. 
Smaragdus,  664b. 
Smith,  George,  28n. 

quoted,  29n. 

"  "        work  referred  to,  32n. 

Smith,  James,  236c. 
Smith,  J.  Pye,  quoted,  550n. 

"  "        work  referred  to,  409n. 

Smith,  R.  P.,  quoted,   349a,   572n,   574b, 

575n. 
Smith,  William,  Dictionary  of  Bible,  729a. 

"  "         referred  to,  61 5n. 

Socrates,  quoted,  646c+. 
Sodom,  Accadian  Poem  on,  33ab. 

"        as  a  Symbolical  Name,  391a. 
Sopherim,  the,  616n. 
Sora,  School  of,  620a. 
Spanlieim,  691ab. 
Spanish  Schools,  621a. 
Speaker's  Conunentary,  731c+. 

"  "  quoted,  541n. 

"  "  referred  to.  432n. 

Spener,  705c. 

Spiegel,  work  referred  to,  25'n. 
Spinoza,  694b,  704a,  705b. 
S])irit  of  an  Literpreter,  156+. 
Stiihelin,  714c. 
Stanley.  A.  P.,  732a. 

"  "      quoted,  207n,  315cn,  404n, 

571c+,  607ben,  610. 
"  "       work  referred  to,  404 n. 

Stephen,  Error  of,  in  Acts  vii,  17,  15(iau. 
Steudcl,  723b. 
Stier,  R.,  725a. 

"      "    quoted,  216c,  218c,  272c+,279n, 
294b,  295b. 
Storr,  723a. 

Stralx),  Walafrid,  663b. 
Strack,  work  referred  to,  129n. 
Strauss,  168c+,  715. 
Strigel,  679a. 
Strong,  James,  735a. 

"  "        ([uotod,  54Sab. 

"  "        work  referred  to,  554iL 


GENERAL    INDEX. 


781 


Stroud,  work  referred  to,  554n. 
Stuart,  Moses,  733a. 

"  "       quoted,     119n+,     173bc+, 

332c,  381c,  493c+,719bc. 
"  "        work     referred     to,     239n, 

20811,  380n,  386n,  425n. 
Stunica,  fi72b. 
Sturlason,  63a. 

Style,  Variety  of,  in  N.  T.  Writers,  126b. 
Suidas,  work  referred  to,  647n. 
Sun  and  Moon  standing  still,  540+. 
Surenhusius,  697a. 

"  work  referred  to,  616n. 

Sveinsson,  62c. 
Swedenborg,  165ab. 
Symbolical  Colours,  393+. 
"  Metals,  395. 

"  Names,  391+. 

"  Numbers,  380+. 

Symbolico-typical  Actions,  340b,  369+. 
Symbols,  Interpretation  of,  347+. 
Synagogue,  the  Great,  605bcn+. 
Synecdoche,  250c +. 
Synonymes,  191+. 

Tabernacle.  Symbolism  of,  359bc+. 
Talbot,  28n. 

"       quoted,  32c. 

"        work  referred  to,  30n,  31n. 
Talmud,  the,  615+. 
Tanaim,  the,  616n. 
Tanchum,  625a. 
Taoism,  40a. 
Tao-teh-King,  the,  46+. 
Targums,  llSa,  614bc+. 
Taylor,  Bayard,  quoted,  93a. 
Taylor,  Isaac,  work  referred  to,  90n. 
Tavlor,  Jeremy,  694c. 
Teller,  711b. 
Tertullian,  654a. 
Testaments,  Old  and  New,  to  be  studied 

together,  18,  596+. 
Textual  Criticism,  129+. 

"    Progress  in,  627c+,  735bc+. 
Theile,  725b. 
Thenius,  720c. 

Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  647c+. 
Theodoret,  649c +. 

"  quoted,  647b. 

Theology,  Biblical  and  Historical,  distin- 
guished, 584b. 
"  Systematic,  dependent  on  Bibli- 

cal Ilermeneutics,  21c+. 
Theophilus  of  Antioch,  635a. 
Tholuck,  724e+. 

"         quoted,  677n. 

"         work  referred  to,  409n. 
Thompson,  J.  P.,  work  referred  to,  57n. 
Thompson,  J.  R.,  work  referred  to,  368n. 
Tomson,  W.  M.,  246c+. 

"  "        work  referred  to,  31Sn. 

Theophylact,  664c+. 


Thorpe,  work  referred  to,  63n. 
Thrumpp,  work  referred  to,  66n. 
Tiberias,  Jewish  School  of,  130bc,  620a. 
Tichonius,  658c+. 
Time,  Prophetic  Designations  of,  385c+, 

495C+. 
Tindal,  704c. 
Tirimis,  688c. 
Tischendorf,  736a. 

"  work  referred  to,  554n. 

Titmann,  737b. 

quoted,  507a. 

work  referred  to,  202n,  506n. 
Toland,  704a. 
Tongues,  Confusion  of.  71c. 

"         Speaking  with,  402bc+. 
Townley,  quoted,  68 In. 
Townsend,  work  referred  to,  554n. 
Translations  of  Bible,  modern,  680,  683a. 
Tregelles,  736b. 

•'         quoted,  135n,  137a. 
"  work  referred  to,  129n. 

Tremellius,  679c. 
Trench,  730a. 

"        quoted,  I75c,  200c,  244c+,  277cn, 
278n,   281n,  283a,  286c,  289c, 
291c,  379c,  538b,  o93c+. 
"        work  referred  to,  202n,  268n. 
Trinity,  Doctrine  of,  586c+. 
Tripitaka,  the,  41+. 
Tropes,  many  and  various,  243a. 
Trumpets,  the  Seven,  47 1+. 
Tiibingen  School  (new),  171n,  716bc. 

"      (old),  723. 
Tuch,  714c. 
Turner,  734a. 

"        work  referred  to,  501n. 
Tyler,  W.  S.,  quoted,  114bc+. 
Tyndale,  681a. 
Types,  Interpretation  of,  334+. 

Ugolino,  work  referred  to,  608n,  616n,  617n. 
Ullmann,  724b. 
Ulphilas,  652b. 
Umbreit,  724b. 

"         quoted,  305b. 
Upham,  quoted,  305b,  520n,  563ii. 
Urbino,  626a. 
Urstius,  685a. 
Usher,  687c. 
Usteri,  724b. 
Usus  Loquendi,  181+. 
Uytenbogaert,  690a. 
Uzziel,  614bc. 

Valla,  Lorenzo,  669b. 
Van  der  Hooght,  698a. 
Van  Oosterzee,  72.7c. 

"  "  quoted,  273c,  584n,  596c+. 

"  "  work  referred  to,  44  5n. 

Van  Mildert,  quoted.  337c. 
Various  Readings.  Causes  of,  130a. 


783 


GENERAL   INDEX. 


Viitiiljlus,  683c. 

Vater,  714b. 

"Vatican  Codex,  131b. 

Vedas,  the,  34+. 

Vendidad,  the,  27bc+. 

Yenema,  696a. 

Versions,  Ancient,  Use  of,  188bc+. 

Victorinus,  654c. 

Vincent  of  Lerins,  659a. 

Visional  Actions,  369a. 

Visional  Symbols,  348a. 

Vispercd,  tlie,  27ab. 

Vitringa,  695b. 

V(i^tius,  691  be. 

Volkmar,  716c. 

Vohiey,  7()4b. 

Voltaire,  704b. 

Voluspa,  the,  63ab+. 

Von  Bohlen,  714c. 

Vossius,  686a,  691a. 

Vulgate,  First  Printing  of,  670b. 

Walton,  684b. 
Wangemann,  qnoted,  293a. 
Warburton,  705a. 

"  work  referred  to,  236n,  569n. 

Waterland,  705a. 
Watson,  Richard,  728b. 

"  "        quoted,  587bc. 

Webster,  729c. 
Wegscheider,  714a. 
Weimar,  Court  of,  709n. 
Weisse,  715c. 
Wells,  703a. 

Wemvss,  work  referred  to,  368n,  383n. 
Wertheim  Bible,  709c,  711b. 
Wesley,  John,  703b. 
Wesley,  Samuel,  703b. 
Wessel,  John,  668c. 
Wesseling,  697b. 
West,  quoted,  636n+. 
Westcott,  736c. 

"  quoted,  560cn+,  561n. 

"  work  referred  to,  563n. 

VVestergaard,  work  referred  to,  25n. 
Westminster  Annotations,  686c+. 

"  Confession,  quoted,  590b. 

Wettstein,  699e+. 
Whedon,  734bc. 

quoted,  26 lab,  342bc,  449n,  508b. 
Whitby,  701a. 


White,  work  referred  to,  380n. 
Whitney,  W.  D.,  quoted.  34bc,  73a. 
"     "        "        Translation   of   Vedic 

Hymn,  36c+. 
"  "        work  referred  to,  39n. 

Whittingham,  681a. 
Wilke,  work  referred  to,  18n. 
Wilkinson,  729c. 
Willeram,  6651). 

Wilson,  Bishop  D..  (luoted,  145a. 
Wilson,  H.  H.,  work  referred  to,  39n. 
Wilson,  work  referred  to,  202n. 
Windischmann,  737b. 

"  work  referred  to,  25n. 

Winer,  208b,  726ab. 

"       quoted,  2U8b,  209bc. 

"       work  referred  to,  507n. 
Winthrop  on  Symbols,  348n. 
Wise,  quoted,  623n. 
Witsius,  695c. 
Woide,  700a. 

Wolf,  Christian  von,  709b. 
Wolf,  J.  C,  697b. 
Wolfenbiittel  Fragments,  711a. 
AVoodhouse,  work  referred  to,  494n, 
Woolston,  704b 

"  quoted,  704b. 

Words  the  Elements  of  Language,  175a. 

"       Meaning  of,  175+. 
Wordsworth,  729c+. 

"  quoted,  532n. 

Wright,  Arabic  Granunar  quoted,  82c4-. 
Wright,  on  Zechariah,  quoted,  354n. 
Wiinsche,  work  referred  to,  608n,  616a 
Wycliffe,  668b. 

Ximenes,  672b. 

Yasna,  the,  26b. 
Year-day  Theory,  386+. 
Yggdrasil,  in  Norse  Mythology,  63n. 
York,  School  of,  662b." 

Zeller,  716c. 
Zigabcnus,  665c+. 
Ziickler,  727c. 

"        work  referred  to,  411n,  426n- 
Zohar,  Book  of,  621bn. 
Zoroaster,  25b. 
Zwingle,  675b. 

"        Dispute  of,  with  Luther,  682il 


k.. 


THE   END. 


DATE  DUE 

> 

■^mmMMMJDK 

M^^ 

i 

''''■   > 

JUL^'^'^ 

'^' 

"" 

. 

■^ 

-  m 

CAVLORO 

PKINT  CO  IN  US    A 

